End Prohibition

[KalithAlur]

I just don't believe it is acceptable to outlaw noninterference crimes.

I don't think the US, or most other prohibitionist countries, are in a position to legalize drugs. Too many complex social factors. Not to mention, there's more important things to be campaigning for than drugs.

I think if nothing changed except one thing in my country, and that one thing was drug prohibition magically disappearing from off the books, Things could easily get much worse than they are right now.

Many of the rules our society has are necessary evils. When it boils right down to it, I don't believe somebody gets to be in charge of your life just because all territory everywhere has been grabbed by governments. The only kind of organized effort to control the lives of other people I believe in, concerns only preventing direct interference crimes thru force, and otherwise resort to communication and willing cooperation.

I don't think it's right to shout, "Anarchy! Chaos!" And really try to overthrow every sign of order and revel in the tidal wave of crime. But I also don't think it's right to abuse power by regulating behavior on a level which has nothing to do with consent crimes.

I am an Anarchist because I believe all forms of control other than self-control, we should at least attempt to overcome. It is only acceptable to me to govern control, to prevent people from being interfered with without myself/yourself interfering directly with the interference.

For me, self-control is submission to whatever seems would have the most positive possible impact on Everything... Not just my family, or my tribe, or my country, or my race of humans. This submission is possible because of an uninterrupted ongoing dialog between me and the universe (or God, or my individual experience, or whatever you want to call it).

So that's where I'm coming from, and sorta what I'm trying to do.

 

[StarCannon]

It is only acceptable to me to govern control, to prevent people from being interfered with without myself/yourself interfering directly with the interference.

I guess your saying something about wanting a moderation of control going on; and that people should grow beyond wanting to control certain things, but could you clarify the above a bit? It's kinda confusing.

 

[KalithAlur]

It's a typo/brainfart.

interfering with Other than the interference itself.

to only make it illegal to control other people, including things like rape theft ect, and even things like forcing people to pay taxes or modifying non-direct-interference behavior with laws.

 

[KalithAlur]

Patrick Henry said, "The great and direct end of government is liberty. Secure our liberties and privileges, and the end of government is answered. If this be not effectively done, government is an evil."

 

[NavyGuy7]

It is not the job of government to protect people from themselves.

Maybe not. But we're better off with certain laws that do just that. However, I don't like too much government control. I'm not going to let them take my right to own a gun away, because I might "shoot myself" or "get shot by someone". But enough on that.

No, it doesn't mean people won't OD - it just means the likelihood of them doing it would be vastly released. Why would people use other ways to get more drugs? Of course, they wouldn't. Nobody trades in illicit alcohol, because it's regulated and easily available to adults. Drugs should be precisely the same.

Perhaps I'm not considering all the factors - but you haven't pointed out any yet that I haven't.

You have too much faith in people. Some people WOULD use other ways to get more drugs. And alcohol can't really be used to represent illegal drugs such as cocaine and meth. The reason those drugs are illegal is because of the massive damage it causes a person. Alcohol, though it can cause massive damage to the liver with excessive use, isn't as dangerous as these drugs when used in moderation. Some drugs, however, cannot be used in moderation. I mean they could, but somewhere along the line people would be craving it so bad (and i mean the highly addictive drugs) they'll find other means to get more of the stuff.

 

[NavyGuy7]

Patrick Henry said, "The great and direct end of government is liberty. Secure our liberties and privileges, and the end of government is answered. If this be not effectively done, government is an evil."

"If men were angels, there would be no need for government."

 

[Peach81]

Maybe not. But we're better off with certain laws that do just that. However, I don't like too much government control. I'm not going to let them take my right to own a gun away, because I might "shoot myself" or "get shot by someone". But enough on that.

So the government cannot take away your right to defend yourself, but it can take away your right to injest whatever you want?

And alcohol can't really be used to represent illegal drugs such as cocaine and meth.

Actually, it can. Alcohol was once just as illegal as any other drug, and its thriving black market created more crime than the police could handle. Bootleggers understood that alcohol was, and still is, the most popular drug in America, and that criminalizing it wasn't going to make it go away. That's why it was decriminalized.

The reason those drugs are illegal is because of the massive damage it causes a person. Alcohol, though it can cause massive damage to the liver with excessive use, isn't as dangerous as these drugs when used in moderation.

Alcoholics can destroy their lives just as completely as any other drug addict. It can cause acute alcohol poisoning, cirrhosis, and a myriad of emotional problems. Drink enough, and it will kill you. And yet, it remains legal. Marijuana, on the other hand, is relatively harmless, and has never killed anyone in the history of mankind. Yet, it is illegal.

Some drugs, however, cannot be used in moderation. I mean they could, but somewhere along the line people would be craving it so bad (and i mean the highly addictive drugs) they'll find other means to get more of the stuff.

This is so whether drugs are legal or illegal. And everything can be done in moderation. It's all about personal responsibility. It's not illegal to overeat, or to drink too much. It's not even illegal to overdose on legal drugs. Allowing the government to tell us what we can and cannot consume is not compatible with being free.

 

[MasterK]

Allowing the government to tell us what we can and cannot consume is not compatible with being free.

I like how you said that.

 

[The Bellman]

Maybe not. But we're better off with certain laws that do just that. However, I don't like too much government control. I'm not going to let them take my right to own a gun away, because I might "shoot myself" or "get shot by someone". But enough on that.

No, we're not better off with certain laws that do just that. We're far worse off.

Some people WOULD use other ways to get more drugs.

Why? Do people use other ways to get illicit booze? Of course not. There's no reason to think they'd do so with drugs, either.

And alcohol can't really be used to represent illegal drugs such as cocaine and meth. The reason those drugs are illegal is because of the massive damage it causes a person. Alcohol, though it can cause massive damage to the liver with excessive use, isn't as dangerous as these drugs when used in moderation. Some drugs, however, cannot be used in moderation. I mean they could, but somewhere along the line people would be craving it so bad (and i mean the highly addictive drugs) they'll find other means to get more of the stuff.

That's all irrelevant. They might well be harmful; perhaps even very harmful. That doesn't mean the government should stop people from using them on the chance that they would harm themselves.

 

[KalithAlur]

Thus far, it seems that alcohol is far more dangerous to people other than the user, than even the most disgusting illegal drugs. Here is a link to drunk driving statistics:

http://www.e-drunkdriving.com/Drunk_Driving_Accidents.html

You want to say it's all about personal responsibility, and it is, just be sure if you'v decided to drink large quantities of alcohol you plan ahead and give your keys to somebody BEfore you get started.

Drinking inspires a part of the brain whut is ego-centric and emotional, a very irrational part of the brain that is likely to compete to prove itself. How many drunks tell thereselves, "I'm ok to drive, I know I can drive, nothing will happen to me," simply because alcohol puts you on a huge ego trip?

Alcohol inspires ego games. I can't criticize alcohol too much without admitting my own great character flaw, probably one of the lowest points of my life (as far as the damage caused and the damage risked): I myself got into a rather nasty dui.

Most of the crime and death inspired by illegal drugs is drug dealer vs. drug dealer and theft/armed robbery to support addiction (aside from drug dealing itself). There would be almost zero drug war deaths after legalization, but it is naive to assume theft and armed robbery would be eliminated.

The only way to extinguish the armed robbery, con artistry, ect., would be to give away free drugs, which to me sounds insane for several reasons: 1. It is stupid to force an entire country to pay for things they don't want to pay for, and taxes would likely be resorted to to pay for these so-called "free drugs". 2. Who wouldn't be tempted to try dangerous legal free drugs? 3. Everybody would get hooked on drugs and stop working. 4. The drug war would become so intense in prohibitionist countries that everybody would hate the legal drug countries (and this is a good point whether or not the drugs are legalized).

Here is an essay, with statistics, on illegal drug-related deaths. Many more people seem to die from tobacco than any other drug, next is alcohol, then heroin and morphine, then cocaine. The significantly low instance of people dying from heroin, morphine, and cocaine can easily be attributed to a successful drug war - at least successful enuf to keep those dangerous illegal drugs from being used very very frequently, if you assume they are used less because they are illegal than they would be thru any legalization process.

http://www.tdpf.org.uk/MediaNews_FactResearchGuide_DrugRelatedDeaths.htm

Whether or not this is true, I don't know, but I do know that the statistic provided makes pot look extremely safe, considering how widely-used it is... very high probability says marijuana is SigNiFiCantLy less dangerous than alcohol or tobacco, even for heavy users who inhale smoke rather than consume orally or use a vaporizer.