Why illegal drugs should STAY illegal.

[QUOTE="X360PS3AMD05"]WTF? I'm pretty sure people smoke it to feel good and don't care about the side effects. My uncle has smoked for over a decade and he's pretty cool, has friends, steady job etc. Never killed anyone or forced us to smoke anything. It's a waste for the government to waste resources on a never ending war. People will continue to use them just like they will continue to go to prostitutes and have abortions. Plus i believe in the right to privacy, so the government should mind their own damn business and stop telling people what they can or can't do.Silver_Dragon17

The side effects are death and mental degradation, along with many others. We need people to help society function; people high on drugs can't function.;) That's why these drugs are illegal.

exactly theres a reason for it and a damn good one too. and for those of you who promote it, well lets just say your ignorant.

For anyone that's been around the block a few times and has lived through the vast majority of "The War on Drugs", they know instantly it's a failure and needs to be revamped or totally scrapped.

There is so much misinformation out there it's disgusting. DARE programs across the nation LIE to children about drug side effects and use, it's that simple. For anyone that's used MJ, and knows the actual side effects they know it's less harmful than Alcohol and tobacco; Two products that fit outside of the war on drugs. Ironic isn't it?

It's a waste of money too, and a violation of rights to not let people do drugs, let alone smoke some pot. The government should have no say as to what I do with my body so long as I'm not hurting anyone else. And plus, pot is harmless. As an occasional smoker and ex-pot head, I know.

Well, Mods, lock this. Or is it okay for people to talk about illegal drugs in a non-illegal way?crucifine

The thread starter is not advocating illegal activity.

The only reason anything is illegal is because the government cannot tax it. It's the same thing with prostitution. There is no way of taxing a persons body, how can you do it? There is so much of it there's no way the government can make money. It's all about politics.Ishy488

What???:|

The only reason anything is illegal is because the government cannot tax it. It's the same thing with prostitution. There is no way of taxing a persons body, how can you do it? There is so much of it there's no way the government can make money. It's all about politics.Ishy488

Sure they can tax it. Tobacco is a plant, and it's taxed. Why can't it be taxed?

The government should not make laws regulating what you can and can't do, whether it can kill you or not. Making laws that make it illegal to live the way you do is one step closer to fascism.Bulldog19892

wuh wuh WHAT!ok,ill agree to one thing they shouldnt make laws regulating what YOU can and cant do,weather it can kill YOU or not.but when someone elses pot smoking or drunk driving affects me,i want it banned,i dont care what extremest says its "facisim" and the goverment is "evil",im not letting some drunk driver who thinks that its his lifestyle and people to deal with it to drive into my niece,nephew,brother or sister.

[QUOTE="Bulldog19892"]The government should not make laws regulating what you can and can't do, whether it can kill you or not. Making laws that make it illegal to live the way you do is one step closer to fascism.guitboxdude25

wuh wuh WHAT!ok,ill agree to one thing they shouldnt make laws regulating what YOU can and cant do,weather it can kill YOU or not.but when someone elses pot smoking or drunk driving affects me,i want it banned,i dont care what extremest says its "facisim" and the goverment is "evil",im not letting some drunk driver who thinks that its his lifestyle and people to deal with it to drive into my niece,nephew,brother or sister.

[QUOTE="Bulldog19892"]The government should not make laws regulating what you can and can't do, whether it can kill you or not. Making laws that make it illegal to live the way you do is one step closer to fascism.guitboxdude25

wuh wuh WHAT!ok,ill agree to one thing they shouldnt make laws regulating what YOU can and cant do,weather it can kill YOU or not.but when someone elses pot smoking or drunk driving affects me,i want it banned,i dont care what extremest says its "facisim" and the goverment is "evil",im not letting some drunk driver who thinks that its his lifestyle and people to deal with it to drive into my niece,nephew,brother or sister.

The only reason anything is illegal is because the government cannot tax it. It's the same thing with prostitution. There is no way of taxing a persons body, how can you do it? There is so much of it there's no way the government can make money. It's all about politics.Ishy488

Honestly, in my opinion, I don't smoke pot, never have, but alcohol and cigarettes are much worse. I really don't consider Marijuana a drug, as much as it is an herb. As far as drugs like L.S.D., Heroin, PCP, Cocaine, Meth, etc. I have seen some terrible things from those drugs (In the media and my personal like) and I just could never support their legalisation. Some of my family have been dangerously threatened by others on those drugs.DejaVu72

Worst argument for legalization is jumping on alcohol. For the record, alcohol in moderation is healthy. Not harmful. If you're going to argue that way...next you'll say water is worse.:roll:

nice copy and pasting. It still doesn't show the point that Pot has yet to kill any one while Tobacco and Alochol kill tens of thousands each year.. It shouldn't be illegal because its OVERFLOWING OUR PRISONS. We have more people in prison then ANY WHERE IN THE WORLD.. We are being forced to early release violent offenders as well as multiple other more serious crimes over drug offenders..

Hell there has been quite a few studies givign evidence that pot is actually beneficial to you in certain amounts.. Not to mention it is a very effective agent in the medical field.. Easy for you to say no one should have it when your NOT IN AGONIZING pain...:roll:

sSubZerOo

yeah...i mean the harder drugs are wothy of jail time but not really marijuana.

[QUOTE="DejaVu72"]Honestly, in my opinion, I don't smoke pot, never have, but alcohol and cigarettes are much worse. I really don't consider Marijuana a drug, as much as it is an herb. As far as drugs like L.S.D., Heroin, PCP, Cocaine, Meth, etc. I have seen some terrible things from those drugs (In the media and my personal like) and I just could never support their legalisation. Some of my family have been dangerously threatened by others on those drugs.LJS9502_basic

Worst argument for legalization is jumping on alcohol. For the record, alcohol in moderation is healthy. Not harmful. If you're going to argue that way...next you'll say water is worse.:roll:

It wasn't really an arguement for the legalization. I just think that in general, alcohol is more harmful than Marijuana. I don't support the legalization. To be honest, I don't really care what they do (It will never happen). But whether or not Marijuana is legal has absolutely no effect on me, so I don't care. I was just giving some thoughts...

[QUOTE="guitboxdude25"]

[QUOTE="Bulldog19892"]The government should not make laws regulating what you can and can't do, whether it can kill you or not. Making laws that make it illegal to live the way you do is one step closer to fascism.Bulldog19892

wuh wuh WHAT!ok,ill agree to one thing they shouldnt make laws regulating what YOU can and cant do,weather it can kill YOU or not.but when someone elses pot smoking or drunk driving affects me,i want it banned,i dont care what extremest says its "facisim" and the goverment is "evil",im not letting some drunk driver who thinks that its his lifestyle and people to deal with it to drive into my niece,nephew,brother or sister.

like i said as long as it kills you,and doesnt kill or affect someone physically it could be legal.but the thing is even though drunk driving is legal,people still do it.once the goverment does something about this,and shows me that people wont smoke pot and drive,or go outside either,then it could be legal.but then again,i think of the people i love and how it would affect me if they started smoking pot,it probably wouldnt kill them if they just stayed inside,but then t would consume theyre life.so i guess im kind of in between as long as there are heavy restrictions.

[QUOTE="Bulldog19892"][QUOTE="guitboxdude25"]

[QUOTE="Bulldog19892"]The government should not make laws regulating what you can and can't do, whether it can kill you or not. Making laws that make it illegal to live the way you do is one step closer to fascism.guitboxdude25

wuh wuh WHAT!ok,ill agree to one thing they shouldnt make laws regulating what YOU can and cant do,weather it can kill YOU or not.but when someone elses pot smoking or drunk driving affects me,i want it banned,i dont care what extremest says its "facisim" and the goverment is "evil",im not letting some drunk driver who thinks that its his lifestyle and people to deal with it to drive into my niece,nephew,brother or sister.

like i said as long as it kills you,and doesnt kill or affect someone physically it could be legal.but the thing is even though drunk driving is legal,people still do it.once the goverment does something about this,and shows me that people wont smoke pot and drive,or go outside either,then it could be legal.but then again,i think of the people i love and how it would affect me if they started smoking pot,it probably wouldnt kill them if they just stayed inside,but then t would consume theyre life.so i guess im kind of in between as long as there are heavy restrictions.

According to your logic, shouldn't alcohol be illegal then?

i think we should legalize it based upon the belief that anyone has the right to do what they want with themselves and I think a lot of stupid liberals wil lsmoke themselves dead

Well I didn't take any of those drugs so I'm not worried.

Worst argument for legalization is jumping on alcohol. For the record, alcohol in moderation is healthy. Not harmful. If you're going to argue that way...next you'll say water is worse.:roll:

LJS9502_basic

Cannabis is beneficial in moderation as well.It has been shown to reduce the chances of Alzheimer's.

Anyway, on to my main point,

I'm sure its been said by some like minded individual but what right does the governement have to tell me how to live my life, i should be able to choose to take any substance i wish in the privacy of my own homeso long as i don't harm others. And i know someone will go on about driving under the influence and they'd be right but i'm not advocating DUI, i'm advocating personal freedoms, the right to do as you wish in your own home.

The reason cannabis was made illegal in the first place was as a way to keep down Mexican immigrants in to the US in the early 20th century. All the medical propaganda came after that as a justification

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Worst argument for legalization is jumping on alcohol. For the record, alcohol in moderation is healthy. Not harmful. If you're going to argue that way...next you'll say water is worse.:roll:

erc500

Cannabis is beneficial in moderation as well.It has been shown to reduce the chances of Alzheimer's.

Anyway, on to my main point,

I'm sure its been said by some like minded individual but what right does the governement have to tell me how to live my life, i should be able to choose to take any substance i wish in the privacy of my own homeso long as i don't harm others. And i know someone will go on about driving under the influence and they'd be right but i'm not advocating DUI, i'm advocating personal freedoms, the right to do as you wish in your own home.

The reason cannabis was made illegal in the first place was as a way to keep down Mexican immigrants in to the US in the early 20th century. All the medical propaganda came after that as a justification

Actually...the report said...MAY reduce the chances. Not does. Inconclusive does not equal fact.

The government tells you many things about how to live your life. No robbery, car theft, drunk driving, domestic abuse, assualt, murder...etc.

At the current time there is differing opinion on marijuana. Stating the objectives of a pro use group, however, is simply using biased arguments.

[QUOTE="erc500"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Worst argument for legalization is jumping on alcohol. For the record, alcohol in moderation is healthy. Not harmful. If you're going to argue that way...next you'll say water is worse.:roll:

LJS9502_basic

Cannabis is beneficial in moderation as well.It has been shown to reduce the chances of Alzheimer's.

Anyway, on to my main point,

I'm sure its been said by some like minded individual but what right does the governement have to tell me how to live my life, i should be able to choose to take any substance i wish in the privacy of my own homeso long as i don't harm others. And i know someone will go on about driving under the influence and they'd be right but i'm not advocating DUI, i'm advocating personal freedoms, the right to do as you wish in your own home.

The reason cannabis was made illegal in the first place was as a way to keep down Mexican immigrants in to the US in the early 20th century. All the medical propaganda came after that as a justification

Actually...the report said...MAY reduce the chances. Not does. Inconclusive does not equal fact.

The government tells you many things about how to live your life. No robbery, car theft, drunk driving, domestic abuse, assualt, murder...etc.

At the current time there is differing opinion on marijuana. Stating the objectives of a pro use group, however, is simply using biased arguments.

Robbery, car theft, drunk driving, domestic abuse, assault, and murder are NOT victimless crimes, though. Now perhaps the extent to which marijuana use is a victimless crime is subjective, but in any case, the crimes you mentioned in your analogy much more clearly violate the rights of others. Even with drunk driving, the standards aren't so much on when you drink so much as when you drive, as standards on driving are to protect the safety of others on the road. By the way, did you see the videos I linked to earlier? Again, they make some good points.

Actually...the report said...MAY reduce the chances. Not does. Inconclusive does not equal fact.

The government tells you many things about how to live your life. No robbery, car theft, drunk driving, domestic abuse, assualt, murder...etc.

At the current time there is differing opinion on marijuana. Stating the objectives of a pro use group, however, is simply using biased arguments.

LJS9502_basic

All those things you mention that are illegal have something in common. Can you guess what it is? By commiting them, you harm others. Someone having a joint in their living room is not harming anyone other than themselves (maybe)

The evidence for marijuana being beneificial is just as strong as the evidence for the benefits of alcohol in moderation.

And another thing, if cannabis ever became legal, the government would tax it meaning the country would be better off, not only would the drugs beout of the hands of criminals, they would have more money to spend on the infrastructure of the country and other appropriate activities for a government

Robbery, car theft, drunk driving, domestic abuse, assault, and murder are NOT victimless crimes, though. Now perhaps the extent to which marijuana use is a victimless crime is subjective, but in any case, the crimes you mentioned in your analogy much more clearly violate the rights of others. Even with drunk driving, the standards aren't so much on when you drink so much as when you drive, as standards on driving are to protect the safety of others on the road. By the way, did you see the videos I linked to earlier? Again, they make some good points.

matthayter700

One...I didn't say they were victimless. I merely pointed out the government does tell you what you can do and in those cases, I would hope you'd agree it's necessary.

Two....drug use oftentimes has victims as well.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Actually...the report said...MAY reduce the chances. Not does. Inconclusive does not equal fact.

The government tells you many things about how to live your life. No robbery, car theft, drunk driving, domestic abuse, assualt, murder...etc.

At the current time there is differing opinion on marijuana. Stating the objectives of a pro use group, however, is simply using biased arguments.

erc500

All those things you mention that are illegal have something in common. Can you guess what it is? By commiting them, you harm others. Someone having a joint in their living room is not harming anyone other than themselves (maybe)

The evidence for marijuana being beneificial is just as strong as the evidence for the benefits of alcohol in moderation.

And another thing, if cannabis ever became legal, the government would tax it meaning the country would be better off, not only would the drugs beout of the hands of criminals, they would have more money to spend on the infrastructure of the country and other appropriate activities for a government

Well, not in the same way as the other crimes LJS mentioned. I think you should reword your statement.

And I'm not sure about the "benefits" of the drugs, butI doknow thatas a scientific fact marijuana is less harmful than alcohol, I remember reading that in a Biology assignment booklet. (I think I found a scanned copy of the booklet online last night actually, I could find that again if anyone's interested...)

But yeah, the point rests more so in terms of the effects of the drugs' legality than in terms of the drugs themselves.

All those things you mention that are illegal have something in common. Can you guess what it is? By commiting them, you harm others. Someone having a joint in their living room is not harming anyone other than themselves (maybe)

The evidence for marijuana being beneificial is just as strong as the evidence for the benefits of alcohol in moderation.

And another thing, if cannabis ever became legal, the government would tax it meaning the country would be better off, not only would the drugs beout of the hands of criminals, they would have more money to spend on the infrastructure of the country and other appropriate activities for a government

erc500

Doesn't matter...the government is still telling you what YOU can do. You argument was that the government shouldn't be allowed to do so. Clean up your language and be more specific then.

Second...the maybe you added shows that perhaps there is a chance of harm to others.

I haven't seen any evidence yet that changes my mind about marijuana....if a report is biased it's definitely not strong. All the links provided in these topics are from pro use groups. That's not strong evidence.

Actually, the government doesn't spend that much simply on marijuana. The illegal drug business entails many more drugs so that argument is out....unless you are advocating legalizing hard drugs as well then there will be minimal effect on the so called drug wars costwise.

[QUOTE="matthayter700"]

Robbery, car theft, drunk driving, domestic abuse, assault, and murder are NOT victimless crimes, though. Now perhaps the extent to which marijuana use is a victimless crime is subjective, but in any case, the crimes you mentioned in your analogy much more clearly violate the rights of others. Even with drunk driving, the standards aren't so much on when you drink so much as when you drive, as standards on driving are to protect the safety of others on the road. By the way, did you see the videos I linked to earlier? Again, they make some good points.

LJS9502_basic

One...I didn't say they were victimless. I merely pointed out the government does tell you what you can do and in those cases, I would hope you'd agree it's necessary.

Two....drug use oftentimes has victims as well.

I never said that you called them victimless, I was pointing out part of the flaw with your analogy. If drug use has "victims" in itself, then they aren't victims as directly as are the victims of the crimes you mentioned.

By the way, I take it from you not responding to my comment about the videos that didn't notice them. I'll re-link them.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=31mjvdPP7dQ

http://youtube.com/watch?v=2HgrAuvUvtg

I never said that you called them victimless, I was pointing out part of the flaw with your analogy. If drug use has "victims" in itself, then they aren't victims as directly as are the victims of the crimes you mentioned.

By the way, I take it from you not responding to my comment about the videos that didn't notice them. I'll re-link them.matthayter700

There was no flaw because there was no analogy. He said the government shouldn't tell him what to do. I gave him a few examples. Not paying his income tax would be another.

That's not true....have you been close to an addict? Many of the other crimes occur due to the addiction. Ie...stealing, assualt, forgery, fraud. Even murders occur due to drug use. So, the victims are just as much victims.

I agree that drugs should stay illegal

besides if they stop caring about the drags they might start attacking video games

[QUOTE="erc500"]

All those things you mention that are illegal have something in common. Can you guess what it is? By commiting them, you harm others. Someone having a joint in their living room is not harming anyone other than themselves (maybe)

The evidence for marijuana being beneificial is just as strong as the evidence for the benefits of alcohol in moderation.

And another thing, if cannabis ever became legal, the government would tax it meaning the country would be better off, not only would the drugs beout of the hands of criminals, they would have more money to spend on the infrastructure of the country and other appropriate activities for a government

LJS9502_basic

Doesn't matter...the government is still telling you what YOU can do. You argument was that the government shouldn't be allowed to do so. Clean up your language and be more specific then.

Second...the maybe you added shows that perhaps there is a chance of harm to others.

I haven't seen any evidence yet that changes my mind about marijuana....if a report is biased it's definitely not strong. All the links provided in these topics are from pro use groups. That's not strong evidence.

Actually, the government doesn't spend that much simply on marijuana. The illegal drug business entails many more drugs so that argument is out....unless you are advocating legalizing hard drugs as well then there will be minimal effect on the so called drug wars costwise.

"Regardless of public opinion, marijuana could be the single most targeted drug in the drug war. It constitutes almost half of all drug arrests, and between 1990-2002, out of the overall drug arrests, 82% of the increase was for marijuana." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Drugs

Not that I'm saying that Wikipedia is necessarily accurate (the abscence of a "this article's neutrality is in dispute" for that article indicating that Wikipedia isn't all that good a source) but within assuming it is true, that would imply that marijuana is a signficant drug in the war on drugs.

[QUOTE="erc500"]

All those things you mention that are illegal have something in common. Can you guess what it is? By commiting them, you harm others. Someone having a joint in their living room is not harming anyone other than themselves (maybe)

The evidence for marijuana being beneificial is just as strong as the evidence for the benefits of alcohol in moderation.

And another thing, if cannabis ever became legal, the government would tax it meaning the country would be better off, not only would the drugs beout of the hands of criminals, they would have more money to spend on the infrastructure of the country and other appropriate activities for a government

LJS9502_basic

Doesn't matter...the government is still telling you what YOU can do. You argument was that the government shouldn't be allowed to do so. Clean up your language and be more specific then.

Second...the maybe you added shows that perhaps there is a chance of harm to others.

I haven't seen any evidence yet that changes my mind about marijuana....if a report is biased it's definitely not strong. All the links provided in these topics are from pro use groups. That's not strong evidence.

Actually, the government doesn't spend that much simply on marijuana. The illegal drug business entails many more drugs so that argument is out....unless you are advocating legalizing hard drugs as well then there will be minimal effect on the so called drug wars costwise.

So your arguments have let you down and you have resorted to arguing semantics, you obviously understood what i was getting across but couldnt think of an appropriate response.

My point, just to clear it up incase any one didnt get it, was that the government shouldnt regulate whatpeople do when it doesnt harm others.

The "maybe" i added in was to indicate that taking cannabis may or may not be harmful to an individual not that it could be harmful to more than just the individual, sorry if that wasnt clear.

You havent seen any evidence that would change your mind? All that means is your ignoring evidence, being selective. There is no such thing as unbiased research, it is all funded by someone with an agenda. You have to exam each study and evaluate its merits. Most studies that are still creditable find no evidence of many of the harms that the government would have you believe.

You are never going to be convinced that cannabis should be legal, you have made your mind up.

Out of simple curiosity, have you ever tried it yourself?

Penn and Teller are not what I call experts. Entertainers with an opinion...sure. Drug users...probably. Biased..yes.LJS9502_basic

In the third video Penn Jillettee claims to never have taken a recreational drug. Either he hasn't or he's flat-out lying in that case. Perhaps Penn and Teller might not be experts themselves, but in those videos they cite who says certain things they quote, and why they would havecredibilityon the issue, so while quoting entertainers may be an example of misplaced authority, I doubt the same could be said for the points made in those videos.

Also, it's kinda annoying that yourepeatedly use the word "biased" as if you're not biased yourself. Of course there's going to be bias, but just look at the points they make, rather than the people who made them, ok?

So your arguments have let you down and you have resorted to arguing semantics, you obviously understood what i was getting across but couldnt think of an appropriate response.

My point, just to clear it up incase any one didnt get it, was that the government shouldnt regulate whatpeople do when it doesnt harm others.

The "maybe" i added in was to indicate that taking cannabis may or may not be harmful to an individual not that it could be harmful to more than just the individual, sorry if that wasnt clear.

You havent seen any evidence that would change your mind? All that means is your ignoring evidence, being selective. There is no such thing as unbiased research, it is all funded by someone with an agenda. You have to exam each study and evaluate its merits. Most studies that are still creditable find no evidence of many of the harms that the government would have you believe.

You are never going to be convinced that cannabis should be legal, you have made your mind up.

Out of simple curiosity, have you ever tried it yourself?

erc500

Actually...it was your argument that let you down. I can ONLY respond to what it is posted. Drug use is NOT a victimless crime anyway dude...so you're wrong on that count as well.

I've read the research from the medical community. I've yet to see them endorse widespread use of marijuana. It's appropriate in a few cases with a prescription. The medical community is the closest you'll get to unbiased. Not to say it's perfect...but close.

I never say anything is totally 100%...however, I have seen no compelling evidence to agree with you at this time. Don't tell me what I will or won't do...you don't know me at all.

In fact, I haven't argued either side of the equation. I haven't come out for legalization nor the status quo. I just point out the flaws I see in arguments...mostly those who jump on alcohol.

Perhaps.;)

In the third video Penn Jillettee claims to never have taken a recreational drug. Either he hasn't or he's flat-out lying in that case. Perhaps Penn and Teller might not be experts themselves, but in those videos they cite who says certain things they quote, and why they would havecredibilityon the issue, so while quoting entertainers may be an example of misplaced authority, I doubt the same could be said for the points made in those videos.

Also, it's kinda annoying that yourepeatedly use the word "biased" as if you're not biased yourself. Of course there's going to be bias, but just look at the points they make, rather than the people who made them, ok?

matthayter700

I'm not biased. Have I mentioned a stance in this thread?:|

With the right argument I could go either way...and, in fact, if I wanted to I could argue the pro users side better than they have. I just have no reason to do so. I haven't seen evidence that compels me.

I don't think the majority of people should smoke marijuana but I do feel that the people who use it recreationally should not get a criminal record for it. Good hard working people and their families get their lives ruined for using a substance that IMO is only as harmful as Nicotine and Alcohol.

I don't think the majority of people should smoke marijuana but I do feel that the people who use it recreationally should not get a criminal record for it. Good hard working people and their families get their lives ruined for using a substance that IMO is only as harmful as Nicotine and Alcohol.

dahwnpapaya

A small amount of marijuana is usually confiscated. No arrests, though.