Americans say country is on wrong track, but votes to stay on it

[Desk trauma]

Do you think narcotics traffickers are in favor of or against decriminalizing narcotics use?

Likely indifferent to it as amounts that classify as trafficking remain illegal and the black market remains largely unchanged. I’m certain they are against legalizing.

 

[Servus]

Likely indifferent to it as amounts that classify as trafficking remain illegal and the black market remains largely unchanged. I’m certain they are against legalizing.

Why would they be against it?

 

[Desk trauma]

Why would they be against it?

Because if something is legal the black market for it shrinks drastically or collapses entirely.

 

[Aldebaran]

You didn't understand what I was suggesting at all. I find that difficult to believe. How on earth is burglary or assault comparable to drug dealing? Everything you mentioned is a one off individual crime. Drugs are a supply and demand problem. There is zero compatability whatsoever. It's growers, smugglers, suppliers and dealers that are part of a systemic problem which results in drug use. And there's no way whatsoever that you can completely shut down that supply chain.

But what you can do is make it redundant. Make the supply of narcotics exactly as was done with alcohol and tobacco. Control the manufacture and distribution yourself. That supply chain then collapses. They'd have nothing to sell that anyone would want to buy. Then you can concentrate on the problems that some narcotics cause.

I'm quite prepared for any reasonable and justified argument against that. Let's knock it around for a while to see where we get. But I am not the slightest bit interested in listening to nonsensical retorts such as yours.

Tobacco and alcohol is strictly controlled. The supply chain hasn't collapsed. It's still out there.
Any other ideas?

 

[Aldebaran]

Because if something is legal the black market for it shrinks drastically or collapses entirely.

If it's legal, the dealers wouldn't have to worry about getting caught and thrown in prison, assuming they didn't already die in a shootout with the police. Having drugs become legal means being able to do their thing without worry of consequences. Too bad the same can't be said of the people they'd be free to sell to.

 

[Servus]

Because if something is legal the black market for it shrinks drastically or collapses entirely.

So how would eliminating narcotics from being a black market item keep them from making and supplying narcotics? Wouldn't that just make them a legitimate business and therefore greatly increase the amount of consumer demand, and therefore greatly increase their revenue?

 

[Desk trauma]

If it's legal, the dealers wouldn't have to worry about getting caught and thrown in prison, assuming they didn't already die in a shootout with the police. Having drugs become legal means being able to do their thing without worry of consequences.

Legalization would mean a regulated industry such like we have for alcohol.

 

[Aldebaran]

Legalization would mean a regulated industry such like we have for alcohol.

Ok, well let's see how many people are dying from it versus the drugs some people want legalized and regulated the same way:

"We hear a lot about the opioid crisis, and rightly so. According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), over 77,000 people died of a drug overdose in 2017. Around 44,800 of those died from an opioid overdose, a nearly five-fold increase over the 8,000 people who overdosed in 1999. Yet, more people died from alcohol use in 2017. Alcohol caused approximately 88,000 deaths each year in the U.S. from the years 2006 to 2010. Why isn’t alcohol getting similar attention? It is the third leading preventable cause of death in the U.S."

The Effects of Alcohol is Killing More People Than Fentanyl

Excessive drinking can kill you more than some drugs like opioids or fentanyl. Learn about alcohol addiction and what treatment options Caron offers.

www.caron.org

 

[Desk trauma]

So how would eliminating narcotics from being a black market item keep them from making and supplying narcotics?

By taking the trade from violent criminals and having legitimate business replace them.

Wouldn't that just make them a legitimate business and therefore greatly increase the amount of consumer demand greatly increasing their revenue?

No, just like the end of alcohol prohibition bringing the trade into legal territory meant the end of bootlegging.

 

[Desk trauma]

Ok, well let's see how many people are dying from it versus the drugs some people want legalized and regulated the same way:

"We hear a lot about the opioid crisis, and rightly so. According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), over 77,000 people died of a drug overdose in 2017. Around 44,800 of those died from an opioid overdose, a nearly five-fold increase over the 8,000 people who overdosed in 1999. Yet, more people died from alcohol use in 2017. Alcohol caused approximately 88,000 deaths each year in the U.S. from the years 2006 to 2010. Why isn’t alcohol getting similar attention? It is the third leading preventable cause of death in the U.S."

The Effects of Alcohol is Killing More People Than Fentanyl

Excessive drinking can kill you more than some drugs like opioids or fentanyl. Learn about alcohol addiction and what treatment options Caron offers.

www.caron.org

Making alcohol illegal, again, would add deaths from tainted product and violence from the illegal trade on top of those deaths, would that be better?

 

[Aldebaran]

Making alcohol illegal, again, would add deaths from tainted product and violence from the illegal trade on top of those deaths, would that be better?

As you have just learned, the death rate from alcohol, both directly and indirectly, already has a higher death rate than drugs that are illegal. Obviously, your assertion that legalization would result in a lower death rate is false. The science (from the CDC, which we shall not deny) has spoken!

 

[Servus]

By taking the trade from violent criminals and having legitimate business replace them.

No, just like the end of alcohol prohibition bringing the trade into legal territory meant the end of bootlegging.

The thing with prohibition is legitimate major companies that manufactured alcohol for consumption had already been in existence for a very long time. Probably most of the trafficking of alcohol during prohibition was in the form of smuggling those same products in from Canada and Mexico.

Whereas there's not been a legitimate business that manufactures heroin and cocaine etc. Those who are already manufacturing narcotics on a large scale would likely still be the ones manufacturing narcotics if narcotics became legal.

 

[Brihaha]

But that is just it, you've heard "people." Most Democrats don't support it, you won't find it in any national Democratic policy. What is more, there are Republicans that support it -- largely of the Libertarian variety that doesn't believe the government should be involved in personal choices. In fact, it seems Republican states are just as likely to want to legalize (at least in terms of Medical Marijuana) as Democratic states; Oklahoma being a prime example. Maybe we should claim it is Republicans that are addicts and want to use drugs?

This is quite true. In fact, former Speaker of the House John Boehner went from legislating against cannabis reform to learning how to allegedly cheat others in the cannabis business in about seven years. He truly never inhaled though.

Inside the John Boehner Weed Lawsuit

A Washington lobbyist says the former Speaker stole his ideas. Boehner says his accuser must be smoking something.

www.politico.com

 

[Desk trauma]

Whereas there's never been a legitimate business that manufactures heroin and cocaine etc

No legitimate business ever made heroin? The word itself was created and patented by Bayer when they were manufacturing and marketing it.

 

[Desk trauma]

As you have just learned, the death rate from alcohol, both directly and indirectly, already has a higher death rate than drugs that are illegal. Obviously, your assertion that legalization would result in a lower death rate is false. The science (from the CDC, which we shall not deny) has spoken!

Again, would it be better to add deaths from tainted product and the violence of the black market be a preferable situation?

 

[Servus]

No legitimate business ever made heroin? The word itself was created and patented by Bayer when they were manufacturing and marketing it.

Yeah, I changed that to not instead of never because that crossed my mind too. When is the last time Bayer et al manufactured heroin or opium in general in the form of laudanum? Over a hundred years ago.

The Harrison Narcotics Tax Act of 1914 restricted the manufacture and distribution of opiates, including laudanum, and coca derivatives in the US.

And even the still legal manufacturing and prescribing of opiates is being cracked down on because it's such a problem.

 

[Aldebaran]

Again, would it be better to add deaths from tainted product and the violence of the black market be a preferable situation?

The fact that you keep asking me that is evidence that you're ignoring that the CDC (The "science" people) reports that MORE people are dying from a regulated product than from unregulated ones. Clearly, regulating a product does NOT reduce deaths. Don't deny the science.

 

[Desk trauma]

The fact that you keep asking me that is evidence that

…you have not address the question.

 

[Bradskii]

Tobacco and alcohol is strictly controlled. The supply chain hasn't collapsed. It's still out there.
Any other ideas?

What? That makes no sense...

The supply chain for alcohol and tobacco is under the control of the government. They determine who makes alcohol. It's very strictly licensed. They control, by various taxes, how strong it is. They control who can sell it. They control where it is sold. When it is sold. Who can drink it. Good grief, in some cases how much of it you can actually drink. That's what strictly controlled means, for heaven's sake. The supply chain is completely under the control of the government.

So did somebody say that we should remove or collapse the supply chain or take control of it? Gosh, I think it was the latter. Let me check...

Yeah, he said 'control the manufacture and distribution yourself.' Just as you do with booze.

Can you please try to read what I am saying and address that rather than making random non sequiturs?

 

[Brihaha]

Do you think narcotics traffickers are in favor of or against decriminalizing narcotics use?

Against for sure. It cuts business in half. And black market dealers still run the risk of being jailed. Maybe more of a risk because the state doesn't want profits impeded by the black market. Desk trauma is explaining it well.