"If drugs were legal, there would be nothing to fight about." - Page 5

"If drugs were legal, there would be nothing to fight about."

This is a discussion on "If drugs were legal, there would be nothing to fight about." within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; IMHO If they removed all laws from drugs there would be no more fighting. Everyone would be sitting around saying " What happenin Dude" May ...

View Poll Results: Security w/ relaxed drug avail.: better/worse?

Voters
152. You may not vote on this poll
  • My family would be safer, on the whole, day-to-day.

    47 30.92%
  • My family would find greater threats, on a daily basis.

    56 36.84%
  • It would be little different from today.

    49 32.24%
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 109

Thread: "If drugs were legal, there would be nothing to fight about."

  1. #61
    Senior Member Array Beans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    AZ Border Territory,
    Posts
    1,002
    IMHO If they removed all laws from drugs there would be no more fighting.

    Everyone would be sitting around saying " What happenin Dude"

    May not in our lifetime but maybe in our grandchildren’s


  2. #62
    Senior Member Array SilenceDoGood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    774
    Quote Originally Posted by Blakestr View Post
    Which ever side you take, I think we all have to be willing to accept that there is some gray in this area and base whatever policy on common sense and pragmatism.

    Ending prohibition definitely took down a major boon for criminals like Capone (if not the IRS) but you will still have instances where people abuse something, like Alcohol, and that's just a fact of human nature that we sometimes will not know when to say "No." I'm not sure there's a single way you can legislate to prevent that.

    Hypothetically if you did legalize everything, even the really hard stuff (I couldn't see proposing such a thing) you would most certainly take a big chunk out of the cartel's business. I think most likely what they would do is just take the money they have and go to some 'legitimate' business. Basically you would take cartel crooks and make them become corporate crooks. A bit more sinister but less actual violence.

    I think it would be much more satisfying to just hunt down and kill the Cartels. But the scale of that manhunt would be very difficult if it occured in America because of our civil liberties, which I would see being threatened...and this opens up a big can o'worms (and possibly a whole separate thread of discussion) on what we are willing to suspend in civil liberties to combat a massive threat. Natural disasters gets us martial law at times, would a cartel war do the same in America?
    WEll said. +1
    "A government is like fire, a handy servant, but a dangerous master." -- George Washington

  3. #63
    Distinguished Member Array nutz4utwo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    yes
    Posts
    1,644
    If everything were legal, there would be no crime...


  4. #64
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    45,482
    More guns = less crime...

    More drugs = more crime...

    Drugs change people, and not for the good. The competition for sales may perhaps be lessened, but the effects of drugs would suck in more people. OMO

    Remove the prohibition on drugs? Certainly worked for alcohol, no one hardly touches that stuff now...
    Yep, bar fights, drunk driving, and mistreatment of families...all gone!
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  5. #65
    VIP Member Array zacii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    arizona
    Posts
    3,801
    I chose 'a little different from today'. The people I come into contact with on a daily basis that could pose a threat to my family already abuse drugs with laws intact. I don't think it would change my family's immediate safety. There may be larger social pros and cons, but like already stated, not conducive to the question polled.
    Trust in God and keep your powder dry

    "A heavily armed citizenry is not about overthrowing the government; it is about preventing the government from overthrowing liberty. A people stripped of their right of self defense is defenseless against their own government." -source

  6. #66
    Distinguished Member Array Stetson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Augusta,Maine
    Posts
    1,630
    Probition was a great experiment that failed,you'd think our government would would have learned from such a failed experiment but they didn't.When you could get codeine,cocaine and opium easily and cheap our government missed an opportunity to tax the drugs out and set precedent now and for the future.
    Anything society seeks for pleasure should and can be taxed at a moderate rate
    for the greater good of the country.
    Last edited by Stetson; September 7th, 2009 at 06:27 PM. Reason: sp

  7. #67
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    28,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Stetson View Post
    Anything society seeks for pleasure should and can be taxed at a moderate rate
    for the greater good of the country.


    I question why much of anything sought by individuals should be taxed at all.

    "Greater good," eh? What in hell is that?

    What is that, other than relinquishment of my choice of what's good for me and substitution of governmental choice of that decision. Do that in the Bronx, and it's called extortion. Do it on Pennsylvania avenue, and it's called "good, progressive government." Ludicrous, generally speaking.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  8. #68
    Senior Member Array Shadowsbane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,051
    Realistically what has our war on drugs accomplished?

    As in, what percentage of the populous uses illegal drugs now than compared to the time when it wasn't illegal?

    Is it really hard to get any drug if one really wants it? I mean they have problems keeping them out of prisions, which are about as sterile of an enviroment as one can hope for regarding that sort of thing.

    As for the OP: People will fight about or over anything. If not drugs then cars or clothing or whatever.

    As for making drugs legal: One would probably see a huge influx of drug use for the first year or so before the numbers dropped back down. If we were to do such a thing we probably could spend a portion of the billions we spend to fight drugs and use them for treatment programs instead.

    Personally though, I would only want them to be legalized if my self defense laws were a bit more relaxed as well. A stand your ground status with an emphasis on whether the perpetrator was under the influence wouldn't be a bad option.

    If a man decides he wants to ruin his life on crack that is his choice. If he decides he wants to get the cash for it by robbing me or mine, I want the ability to defend myself without any fear of a lengthy court battle over the incident.
    Now, we must all fear evil men. But there is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men.

    www.Lonelymountainleather.com

  9. #69
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    28,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowsbane View Post
    Realistically what has our war on drugs accomplished?
    Artificially-raised prices, -raised brutality of "enforcement" on both sides; -impacted general availability only in terms of volume, not in terms of access. Agreed: little benefit, at the cost of multiple $billions, by the score, ten times over, then ten times again.

    If we were to do such a thing we probably could spend a portion of the billions we spend to fight drugs and use them for treatment programs instead.
    For many of those helped to eject, it could be valuable assistance. But, like most any government-run program, inefficiencies and huge cost would be its ultimate downfall.

    Personally though, I would only want them to be legalized if my self defense laws were a bit more relaxed as well.
    Acknowledgment that the 2A is the law of the land, that it applies to all citizens, and that no federal or state statutes intrude on that. I doubt I'll see this in my lifetime, so I'll take a somewhat watered-down variant:

    • Absolutely iron-clad "stand your ground" law.
    • Absolutely iron-clad "Castle" law.
    • Absolute presumption of innocence; presumption of legitimate, justifiable fear of loss of life/limb if acting in a place you have every right to be; coverage by the city/county/state of all legal costs if no-billed or acquitted.


    If a man decides he wants to ruin his life on crack that is his choice. If he decides he wants to get the cash for it by robbing me or mine, I want the ability to defend myself without any fear of a lengthy court battle over the incident.
    Yup.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  10. #70
    Senior Member Array Shadowsbane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,051
    Granted treatment would still probably be doomed to failure from a governmental standpoint. It would still be cheaper.
    Now, we must all fear evil men. But there is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men.

    www.Lonelymountainleather.com

  11. #71
    Senior Member Array stanislaskasava's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    1,121
    Some are saying "Alcohol is just as bad as drugs, so drugs should be legal too!" If that is the case, I think it makes more sense to reinstate prohibition than to legalize drugs.

    I think the real problem is lack of sufficient punishment for breaking whatever laws we have agreed upon. If your teenage child drinks your liquour and nearly burns the garage down, is it sane to punish him by grounding him for a week? The potential weight of a punishment must be so great as to outweigh any possible motivations for a crime.

    If we want less drug use does it make more sense to increase the punishment or decrease it?

    Why do druggies do crimes like theft or prostitution? Is it because the average paycheck isn't enough money to support the average cost of a drug habit? Or is it because the extraordinarily strong addictive nature of modern drugs compels druggies to get high so often as to not be able to keep a full time job? Or maybe drugs rot your brain until you are worthless as an employee?

    If the government provides cheap or free drugs to anyone that wants them, isn't it obvious that addictive nature + constantly increasing tolerance = fried-brains-a-plenty?

    It should be easy to see that the outcome will be that drug users will inevitably cross a threshold in their addiction that leaves them unable to work (except for prostitution, etc.) or function in society. If drugs are sold for minimal cost, druggies will still require cash to get high. More addicts = more stolen property. If drugs are free for the taking -- or cheap enough that returning soda cans for the deposit will pay the cost -- how many will succumb to an overdose within a year? What other possible outcome is there to providing an unlimited supply of harmful drugs which can become addictive as soon as the first use?

    The solution is to make drugs extremely expensive. Drug dealers must be so afraid of the consequences of being convicted that they refuse to sell drugs for any amount of money. If you knew that you would face 20 years in prison for selling drugs, wouldn't you find a legitimate job? If 20 years doesn't stop drug dealers, increase it to 30 years or life, or even execution. The penalty must be increased until the motives for the crime are outweighed.

  12. #72
    VIP Member
    Array Pistology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Coast LA Cty
    Posts
    2,180
    Yo, Stanis, many drug warriors are looking down a sentence of execution whenever they ply their illegal trade as the price of doing business. Yet the drug war rages. Why? Profit motive. Drugs are expensive enough.
    Government, at least a civilized one, is not designed to legislate vice. Leave it to the medical industry, counselling, and self-help groups. Not police and punishment.
    Americans understood the right of self-preservation as permitting a citizen to repel force by force
    when the intervention of society... may be too late to prevent an injury.
    -Blackstone’s Commentaries 145–146, n. 42 (1803) in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

  13. #73
    Senior Member Array stanislaskasava's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    1,121
    Quote Originally Posted by Pistology View Post
    Yo, Stanis, many drug warriors are looking down a sentence of execution whenever they ply their illegal trade as the price of doing business. Yet the drug war rages. Why? Profit motive. Drugs are expensive enough.
    Government, at least a civilized one, is not designed to legislate vice. Leave it to the medical industry, counselling, and self-help groups. Not police and punishment.
    Execution? 30 years later and after 15 appeals?

    Or, do you know something I don't? I would love to read about drug dealers meeting their maker shortly after conviction. Maybe you can post the link? I won't hold my breath.

    Perhaps you are referring to execution on the street by rival dealers or police? Whatever it is, it's not enough of a risk to outweigh the motivation to do the crime. Dealers need to believe that they face certain death, not a .001% chance.

  14. #74
    Member Array yzcrasher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    349
    Pot is the only drug that should be legal. As another poster said it is a downer. It is also NOT an addicting drug. I do know lots of people that smoke (one owns his own business), and none of them are drains on society. These are people that work just as hard as anyone else and pay the bills just like anyone else. Alcohol IS way worse than pot. I honestly can't believe people actually argue otherwise.
    Meth/crack/coke etc... on the other hand are bad news, and the world would be a better place if those drugs were wipe off the map.
    ((Place funny, whitty comment here))

  15. #75
    Senior Member Array Chevy-SS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    926
    Quote Originally Posted by stanislaskasava View Post
    ........ If 20 years doesn't stop drug dealers, increase it to 30 years or life, or even execution. The penalty must be increased until the motives for the crime are outweighed.

    OK, so here's the scenario...... Your 20-year old kid buys a small bag of pot. He then "splits" it with a friend, that is, the friend gives your kid half the money and then your kid gives half the pot to his friend.

    In Rhode Island, the law says your kid is now a full-on "drug dealer". Does this offense merit execution? You want your kid to be executed because he shared a small bag of pot with someone else?

    Many people do not realize how easy it is to be labeled a "drug dealer" under current law.

    -
    'Be careful, even in small matters' - Miyamoto Musashi

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Classic "they brought knives to a gun fight"
    By Chaplain Scott in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: June 1st, 2010, 01:18 PM
  2. Wisconsin AG issues opinion, "open carry is legal"
    By Kevin Jensen in forum Open Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: April 26th, 2009, 10:23 AM
  3. Course Review: Tactical Response "The Fight" FOF Scenarios
    By KenpoTex in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 21st, 2008, 06:38 PM
  4. "Buying stolen stuff and it's completely legal. Learn how tonight at 10"
    By INTJ in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: May 3rd, 2007, 08:54 PM
  5. Legal obligation to order "cease and desist" before stopping the threat?
    By NaturalSelection in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: May 28th, 2006, 05:14 AM

Search tags for this page

after the wisconsin doj cashes your check when will i get my ccw permit

,

chl caught with marijuana in texas

,

texas chl prescription drugs

Click on a term to search for related topics.