Drug Rights Drug prohibition is a violation of the fundamental right of every individual to control his or her own body. Drug prohibition involves the use of force to jail people and to extract money from people to pay for it all. It is a moral principle, to libertarians and many others, that force is wrong except when used in defense. What justifies this use of force? Against whom are drug users or dealers committing violence? Some argue that the use of drugs is violence against "the community." But the community is an abstraction meaning all the individuals who comprise it. The community does not think or act, and it does not have rights. Only individuals think, act and have rights. Your right to live in the type of community you desire does not permit you to force others to live in such a community. Some argue that communities have the right to enforce any code of behavior they desire. The first flaw in this argument is that again, the community is an abstraction, and does not have desires. How do you express the desire of a community? Advocates of enforced morality vary in answers to this question, from majority-rule to the divine right of kings. Thinking people will certainly recognize that individuals have rights that no majority, however large, can morally infringe. Otherwise, the Nazi genocide of Jews and other tragedies littering human history are justifiable. Are dealers committing violence against users? This argument maintains that drugs eliminate choice, presumably by addiction. Consider the implications of this argument: surely drug use should be legal, since drug use does not even involve choice, much less criminal intent. Growing or manufacturing drugs for personal use should be legal, since a person cannot coerce himself. And if a person is capable of choosing to grow, manufacture and use a drug, why is that person incapable of choosing to purchase the drug?
Drug use is not a fundamental right when it violates the rights of others, or puts them at risk. As is the case with most drugs which can alter a person's body functions to the point where they are not fully in control. By the logic of the above argument, drunk driving should also be legalized.... think about that for a minute.
no becasue drinking and driving is endanering the pubilc thus should be illegal, but if you want to sit in your own home and snork some coke, or shoot up on herion, who am I to tell you that it is wrong? While I may not agree with you nor would i do it myself you have the right to destory your own body,
If legalized, the challenge would be to keep drug use in the home, on a personal level. Alcohol, being legalized, has a higher tendency to find it's way onto the streets and in cars. I think the same would happen with drugs. But right now with drugs being illegal, I think that confines it's usage to the more private sector. Who is to say what would happen if it were accepted by society? Summary: Maybe the threat of public druggedness (heehee) is enough to justify the illegality of it. At least this way, it would be more likely to stay in the home.
No, not really Not necessarily in the private sector I guess, but more on the low-down (down low... no doubt!). Narcotics usage would be on a much higher profile if legalized. I understand how prohibition can help to worsen the problem, but I think it's effects are on about the same level as legalizing it. If drug use is legalized, that sends the message that it is ok to do... at least in the type of society that we live in today. I think you would see an increase because of this.... if nothing else all aspects should remain equal, I don't see how there would be a considerable decrease.
well not just a decrease in the actual usages but what about the other benifts 1> regulated dosage 2> regulated Prices 3> less "cutting" of harmful substances all of these would make for a "safer" drug enviroment combin this with useing the taxes collect from the legal us of the drug for the true education of the public (unlike what they do today) and you would see a decrease in drug related deaths and most likly a decrease in usage Can you agree that the current why of ahnding the drug problem is not working?
Oh, definately. You mentioned taxes, which brings up another point-- if drugs were legalized, the taxes/revenue from sales would be tremendous. It would be EXTREMELY hard for our current government to regulate sales considering the already absurdly high user rates. Also, I worry that prices would be considerably high for drugs..... leading to an even wider gap in social status. Basically, poor people (who are already account for the majority of drug abusers) would become even poorer. Due to the fact that drugs are addicting (either chemically or psychologically) purchasing them would become a necessity..... just as cigarettes and alcohol are now, only on a much larger scale.
now we are going to get on the adictive arugement Some people can be addicted to EVERYTHING food is attictive now days, as is just about everything else so why are drug treated differant From the Age of 16 till about 2 years ago I drank and Smoked(weed) HEAVILY, I am taking at least 1/5 a day of hard liquor, and 1/4-1/2oz of weed a day by myself, then one day I just decided for no real reason to go clean for while, and I have not looked back, alot of my freinds drink and smoke all around me, I have no cravings at all, if i want to drink or smoke again in the future I probally will but right now my goal is ot get my business off the ground and everything else in my life has taken a back seat to that. Now I do argee that some drugs have a more addictive properties to them, but I still think that the addtics are using it as a excuse Liek with cigarette,s my dad smoked about a pack a day for over 20 years and then watched his father die from cancer, the next day he through away is cigarettes and quite, not pack or other BS just stoppped doing it, it is all in the mind
Excuse or not, Truly addictive or not, You still have to consider the overall effects this would have financially, regardless of the above. Economically. As for addiction: Chemically addictive substances are obvioiusly more tough to break. Drugs that are solely psychologically addictive are easier to break from, but still there is a human factor involved...... to some extent addiction is present no matter what. The ability to overcome that varies individually and no doubt it can be done.
well the econmic inpact would be less anyway, street prices even with taxation would be ALOT lower than they are now
Now that one's going to be hard to debate from either side, since we don't know for sure what the legal prices would be. I think the goverment would start by offering it low to combat street prices. Once they had a high volume flowing, the price would gradually increase. And if useage proved to remain high, so would the price. Just as cigarettes. Then you'd have all kinds of border shops selling the stuff, perhaps with questoinable content... then we'd have to worry about illegal trafficing, just as we do now. I think no matter how you look at it, there are an infinite number of problems with both legalizing drug use AND keeping it illegal. I don't see the government legalizing it anytime soon. Does anyone?
well I dont see them doing it either becasue belive it or not they get MORE money now by keeping it illegal than they would by legalizing it trust me the goverment ONLY cares about MONEY, now I am sure everything dissagrees, but the sad fact is they EVERYTHING in today's world revolves around the all mightly dollar. There are way to stop drug use at least in part but the current method of "rehab" does not work because most of the court rehab does NOTHING for the person. all it does is take money from them in a LARGE scale and put them back out on the street unhleped in which they will be arrested agian for more fee's and fines in the "rehab" process
