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

[Servus]

.

 

[variant]

I hear other reasons for legalizing drugs as well. Like it will put the cartels out of business. But really, folks just want to get stoned.

The US has an insane drug policy that has gone on for a generation. That people would be tired of being brutalized by a police state over minor drugs is entirely understandable.

 

[Servus]

The US has an insane drug policy that has gone on for a generation. That people would be tired of being brutalized by a police state over minor drugs is entirely understandable.

If they stopped taking narcotics the problem would be solved. I don't see making it easier to take narcotics as a solution.

 

[variant]

If they stopped taking narcotics the problem would be solved. I don't see making it easier to take narcotics as a solution.

I for one don't take any drugs, but also don't see the point in waging war over pot.

But again, you don't see yourself as part of the problem even though society has as a whole been turning against a needless drug war.

 

[Servus]

I for one don't take any drugs, but also don't see the point in waging war over pot.

But again, you don't see yourself as part of the problem even though society has as a whole been turning against a needless drug war.

I've heard multiple times that most or all narcotics should be legalized.

"Advocates of drug legalization believe that making high-quality drugs cheaply and widely available will eliminate the illegal drug market, regulate quality and price, and decrease law enforcement costs including arrest and incarceration."

Drug Legalization | Institute for Behavior and Health

www.ibhinc.org

As I said in the beginning, the opinions of voters that I've seen expressed is this is more likely to occur with Democrats in charge.

Personally like I said, I think people just want getting stoned to become much easier. And of course the problem is, many of them become homeless drug addicts or die from overdose.

 

[inquiring mind]

A: 'How do you think your team is going to go this year?'
B: 'Not well. I think we're heading in the wrong direction. Maybe we need a new coach'.
A: 'How about this guy instead?'
B: 'Are you kidding me? He's got no idea whatsoever. No way I'd want him in charge. If that's the choice then my vote goes to the guy we already have'.

Make sense?

Yes, kind of like sinking in quicksand and refusing to grab a rope thrown by someone you don't like.

 

[comana]

I've heard multiple times that most or all narcotics should be legalized.

At the very least we could decriminalize small amounts. No reason to waste court time and incarcerate for simply using and/or possessing small amounts.

 

[SimplyMe]

I've heard multiple times that most or all narcotics should be legalized.

"Advocates of drug legalization believe that making high-quality drugs cheaply and widely available will eliminate the illegal drug market, regulate quality and price, and decrease law enforcement costs including arrest and incarceration."

Drug Legalization | Institute for Behavior and Health

www.ibhinc.org

As I said in the beginning, the opinions of voters that I've seen expressed is this is more likely to occur with Democrats in charge.

Personally like I said, I think people just want getting stoned to become much easier. And of course the problem is, many of them become homeless drug addicts or die from overdose.

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?

 

[variant]

I've heard multiple times that most or all narcotics should be legalized.

"Advocates of drug legalization believe that making high-quality drugs cheaply and widely available will eliminate the illegal drug market, regulate quality and price, and decrease law enforcement costs including arrest and incarceration."

Drug Legalization | Institute for Behavior and Health

www.ibhinc.org

As I said in the beginning, the opinions of voters that I've seen expressed is this is more likely to occur with Democrats in charge.

Personally like I said, I think people just want getting stoned to become much easier. And of course the problem is, many of them become homeless drug addicts or die from overdose.

Democrats don't have such an extreme position though, you're the one espousing that for them.

In the real world I agree with democrats moderate position on drugs to Republicans desire to do what we've always done and have an insane national drug policy.

People get tired of being told what they believe by people who simply want something easy to rail against.

 

[Servus]

At the very least we could decriminalize small amounts. No reason to waste court time and incarcerate for simply using and/or possessing small amounts.

Perhaps not incarcerating, but at least fining. A lot of times those small amounts are found after a person is pulled over for impaired driving.

 

[comana]

Perhaps not incarcerating, but at least fining. A lot of times those small amounts are found after a person is pulled over for impaired driving.

I driving while impaired is already a crime. Adding possession is excessive.

 

[Servus]

Democrats don't have such an extreme position though, you're the one espousing that for them.

In the real world I agree with democrats moderate position on drugs to Republicans desire to do what we've always done and have an insane national drug policy.

People get tired of being told what they believe by people who simply want something easy to rail against.

No I'm not espousing that for them, I'm reporting what I hear from them. Often along the lines of why they're democrats and why they hate the "fascist" republican bureaucracy. You seem to be pretty much expressing the same thing in a more subtle way.

 

[Servus]

I driving while impaired is already a crime. Adding possession is excessive.

So apparently you think taking narcotics should be legalized. And if so, you don't see any negative repercussions in that?

 

[Servus]

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?

Who's more likely to eliminate or at least reduce drug laws? The democrats or the republicans?

 

[comana]

So apparently you think taking narcotics should be legalized. And if so, you don't see any negative repercussions in that?

Decriminalized. Not the same as legalizing.

 

[Servus]

Decriminalized. Not the same as legalizing.

What's the difference in practical terms?

 

[comana]

What's the difference in practical terms?

Not legal to sell, buy or possess amounts deemed as trafficking. Possessing small amounts considered personal use amounts and using is not a crime on its own.

 

[variant]

No I'm not espousing that for them, I'm reporting what I hear from them. Often along the lines of why they're democrats and why they hate the "fascist" republican bureaucracy. You seem to be pretty much expressing the same thing in a more subtle way.

No, what you're doing is trying to speak for others.

Putting words and ideas in their mouths that are easier to argue against than say, a moderated drug policy that doesn't imprison more people for drug offences than any other country in the world.

What I am doing is arguing against your actual position, that the Republican party has anything like a sane drug policy.

The Republican's policy on drugs is to become more and more draconian via the police and try to imprison as many people as possible. And, as long as we as a society continue fighting a senseless war on our own population I'm going to hold the same opinion.

And no. I'm not calling republicans fascists, they are something else entirely, but that doesn't make it a good thing.

 

[Aldebaran]

Not legal to sell, buy or possess amounts deemed as trafficking. Possessing small amounts considered personal use amounts and using is not a crime on its own.

Allowing people to use it won't help to keep drug overdoses from taking up valuable hospital space, or raising health costs, or health insurance rates. In fact, not much good at all comes from allowing narcotics use.

 

[comana]

Allowing people to use it won't help to keep drug overdoses from taking up valuable hospital space, or raising health costs, or health insurance rates. In fact, not much good at all comes from allowing narcotics use.

There will always be drug addicts and alcoholics. Locking them up for using is not the solution. Food addicts also take up hospital space and raise healthcare costs. There are many vices to choose from and I guarantee humans will always have vices.