Latin America changing strategies on war on drugs

Bill Harris · Feb 15, 2010

Thanks everyone who responded to my post

David, Nobody wants to trip on acid at the grocery store. The way to keep hard drugs in check is to make them available by presciption. Make best-practice information available to doctors so that users can achieve their intentions without undue risk of bad outcomes to self, others, and the public.

DodgeFB, I didn't mean close all the prisons. I just meant close the extra prisons which have been built to accommodate drug-law offenders. We can keep some gaols, for real criminals.

deanhills, Addiction is not a crime. I have been an addict for 45 years, and have not had a single sick day in ten years. I agree with you that prisons are really necessary, just not for drug users.

deanhills · Feb 16, 2010

Bill Harris said:
deanhills, Addiction is not a crime. I have been an addict for 45 years, and have not had a single sick day in ten years. I agree with you that prisons are really necessary, just not for drug users.

Depends what you are addicted to of course. If the addiction is for Twinkies, then you are OK. But if it is coccaine, then I believe that is not allowed.

GOP · Feb 16, 2010

Bill Harris said:
David, Nobody wants to trip on acid at the grocery store. The way to keep hard drugs in check is to make them available by presciption. Make best-practice information available to doctors so that users can achieve their intentions without undue risk of bad outcomes to self, others, and the public.

So where are we going to stop? Are we going to make everything legal as long as their are demands for it, even though it's criminal?

David · Feb 16, 2010

GOP said:
So where are we going to stop? Are we going to make everything legal as long as their are demands for it, even though it's criminal?

It wouldn't be criminal.

GOP · Feb 16, 2010

David said:
It wouldn't be criminal.

No, but it is as of today.

Dirk · Feb 17, 2010

GOP said:
So where are we going to stop? Are we going to make everything legal as long as their are demands for it, even though it's criminal?

Same-sex relationships/relations.

GOP · Feb 18, 2010

Dirk said:
Same-sex relationships/relations.

If you're comparing that too drugs, I think that's insane. Drugs are dangerous and used in criminal societies. Can't really say the same for homosexuals.

David · Feb 18, 2010

GOP said:
If you're comparing that too drugs, I think that's insane. Drugs are dangerous and used in criminal societies. Can't really say the same for homosexuals.

Agreed. You seem to be reaching, Dirk.

Dirk · Feb 18, 2010

GOP said:
If you're comparing that too drugs, I think that's insane. Drugs are dangerous and used in criminal societies. Can't really say the same for homosexuals.

Well, you can't draw a direct parrallel with anything.

My point was more that people should be free to do with their own bodies what they wish/are inclined to do.

GOP · Feb 18, 2010

Dirk said:
My point was more that people should be free to do with their own bodies what they wish/are inclined to do.

The differences here is that when you live a life as gay and you have a relationship with one of the same sex, that is much less dramatic for our society and for human lives than compared to when a person wants to live like he or she pleases by using drugs. That has so fatal consequences for many people today.

Dirk · Feb 19, 2010

GOP said:
The differences here is that when you live a life as gay and you have a relationship with one of the same sex, that is much less dramatic for our society and for human lives than compared to when a person wants to live like he or she pleases by using drugs. That has so fatal consequences for many people today.

You seriously want to control what people smoke?

And mind, tolerance of gays was/is a pretty major change for society.

GOP · Feb 19, 2010

Dirk said:
You seriously want to control what people smoke?

No, tobacco is fine with me. But marijuana is defined as a drug, and therefore it should be illegal. People who smoke marijuana today has a very high tendency to mix further into drug relations, so forbid them from the start, instead of mixing further into drug addiction.

Dirk said:
And mind, tolerance of gays was/is a pretty major change for society.

It is not a good comparison. It was a major change for many in society, but not a dangerous one. Legalizing drugs is both a major and dangerous change for society. Can't really compare it to human relations.

Dirk · Feb 19, 2010

GOP said:
No, tobacco is fine with me. But marijuana is defined as a drug, and therefore it should be illegal. People who smoke marijuana today has a very high tendency to mix further into drug relations, so forbid them from the start, instead of mixing further into drug addiction.

Tobacco is a drug. Alohol is a drug. Both are more dangerous than marijuana.

Firstly, there's no evidence that suggests marijuana is an "entry drug".

And secondly, its illegality is a coincidence. There's no reasoning behind it. If you look into its past, it's really very interesting. Actually really funny.

It is not a good comparison. It was a major change for many in society, but not a dangerous one. Legalizing drugs is both a major and dangerous change for society. Can't really compare it to human relations.

Well, no, it's not a good comparison in that sense.

Wasn't the point i was making, but if it makes you happy.

GOP · Feb 19, 2010

Dirk said:
Tobacco is a drug. Alohol is a drug. Both are more dangerous than marijuana.

But they are legal. It's not like a support misuse of alcohol or tobacco either, but at least they're internationally recognized. Compared to marijuana which is not.

Dirk said:
Firstly, there's no evidence that suggests marijuana is an "entry drug".

No proof, look at teenagers who start carefully with marijuana, doesn't take long until they want to start with stronger drugs.

Dirk said:
Well, no, it's not a good comparison in that sense. Wasn't the point i was making, but if it makes you happy.

So what was your point?

Dirk · Feb 19, 2010

GOP said:
But they are legal. It's not like a support misuse of alcohol or tobacco either, but at least they're internationally recognized. Compared to marijuana which is not.

My point exactly. Why is it not legal? When it is less dangerous. Funny that when you're accusing an anarchist of being a statist, you are th one that supports the primacy of the state.

No proof, look at teenagers who start carefully with marijuana, doesn't take long until they want to start with stronger drugs.

That's what i said, no proof. Personal experience is not proof. But if you want to play that little game, when i took marijuana i had no inclination to move onto stronger drugs.

So what was your point?

That i don't think the state should have sovereignty over what individuals decide to do to themselves.

GOP · Feb 19, 2010

Dirk said:
My point exactly. Why is it not legal? When it is less dangerous. Funny that when you're accusing an anarchist of being a statist, you are th one that supports the primacy of the state.

I support a protection of the people. Not a dictation of the people. This goes, by me, under the definition of protection. We would want a clear and awake population, not a bunch of druggies.

Dirk said:
That's what i said, no proof. Personal experience is not proof. But if you want to play that little game, when i took marijuana i had no inclination to move onto stronger drugs.

Of course, and most teenagers have tried marijuana and managed to handle it and move on. But some don't, and most people who are mixed into the criminal gangs that we currently see started out somewhere. With marijuana.

Dirk said:
That i don't think the state should have sovereignty over what individuals decide to do to themselves.

So with drugs you think the state should be without power, but on other more human areas the state should have everything to say?

Dirk · Feb 19, 2010

GOP said:
I support a protection of the people. Not a dictation of the people. This goes, by me, under the definition of protection. We would want a clear and awake population, not a bunch of druggies.

But... you support alcohol being legal? :giggle:

Laws don't make much difference anyway - it's just a justification for state coercion.

Of course, and most teenagers have tried marijuana and managed to handle it and move on. But some don't, and most people who are mixed into the criminal gangs that we currently see started out somewhere. With marijuana.

You realise, though, i hope, that this is a waste of time until you produce an independent study.

Honestly, i wouldn't even care if you did - i support the legalisation of all drugs.

So with drugs you think the state should be without power, but on other more human areas the state should have everything to say?

Something you will learn about me is that ultimately, i don't think the state should ever have anything to say.

Not in controlling people, not in restricting their liberty.

GOP · Feb 19, 2010

Dirk said:
But... you support alcohol being legal? :giggle:

Of course. Alcohol can be enjoyed in a totally different manner than marijuana can be.

Dirk said:
Laws don't make much difference anyway - it's just a justification for state coercion.

Of course it makes a difference. If marijuana was legal everyone could go around in the streets without feeling any danger about the police popping up and arresting them.

Dirk said:
You realise, though, i hope, that this is a waste of time until you produce an independent study.

Honestly, i wouldn't even care if you did - i support the legalisation of all drugs.

Obviously you wouldn't care if I did. You support the legalization of all drugs? Now that shows LITTLE study.

Dirk said:
Something you will learn about me is that ultimately, i don't think the state should ever have anything to say.

Not in controlling people, not in restricting their liberty.

Translation: chaotic and uncontrollable society.

Dirk · Feb 19, 2010

GOP said:
Of course. Alcohol can be enjoyed in a totally different manner than marijuana can be.

In what way different? The only difference is the method of ingestion.

Of course it makes a difference.

Why, would you take marijuana if it were legal?

If marijuana was legal everyone could go around in the streets without feeling any danger about the police popping up and arresting them.

Exactly.

Obviously you wouldn't care if I did. You support the legalization of all drugs? Now that shows LITTLE study.

It would be interesting to see you give it a go, though.

I don't support it because they aren't a threat to health, i support it because i agree with individual choice.

Translation: chaotic and uncontrollable society.

Haha. Statist argument. Uncontrollable, yes. Good thing, too. I'd hate to be controlled. Humans crave order, though, i don't think chaos is physically possible.

GOP · Feb 19, 2010

Dirk said:
In what way different? The only difference is the method of ingestion.

And the reaction after.

Dirk said:
Why, would you take marijuana if it were legal?

No.

Dirk said:
Exactly.

The police should be popping up anywhere and everywhere, so people don't use the drug.

Dirk said:
I don't support it because they aren't a threat to health, i support it because i agree with individual choice.

Cold. Simply cold and selfish, that is what I get out of it this. Do you believe it's right to let people choose overdose and drug addiction and when they're in a the predicament they're only going to be told it was an individual choice? Horrible!

Dirk said:
Haha. Statist argument. Uncontrollable, yes. Good thing, too. I'd hate to be controlled. Humans crave order, though, i don't think chaos is physically possible.

Some crave order, and some love chaos. That mixture would in a lawless country, would be poison.

Latin America changing strategies on war on drugs

Similar threads