Drug based economy. Why not?
- Thread starter KINGOFSHORTS
- Start date
Yeah...they dont overdose from marijuana, they just cough until their lungs bleed and they drown in this own blood, or until they have a brain aneurism from the coughing. 99.9% of those marijuana deaths get classified as..."respiratory problem" or "brain aneurism"
You telling me you've never smoked marijuana and coughed for a good 30 seconds while trying to catch your breath? You think an old man or woman with repiratory issues can stand that kind of coughing?
So let's assume everything you say is true (which it isn't). How does making it illegal solve the problem? When you make something illegal any transactions that occur with the illegal good occur outside of the shadow of the law. This means that property rights of the parties involved are in no way protected by the established law enforcement. The result is the only way to protect one's interests in the transaction is to be armed and willing to use your weapons.
Regardless of whether drugs are good or bad, right or wrong, moral or immoral, the fact remains that there is a market for them, a huge market. This is obvious since in the US, most drugs are illegal yet transactions with those drugs take place all the time. The only thing that criminalizing drugs accomplishes is it rewards those willing and able to use violence with the benefits of supplying that which the market demands. Why not let honest business people get rich satisfying a natural bid? Are you pro violence?
All drugs should be legal. We all know that heroin is bad for you. Yet people still want it and buy it. By making it illegal, you are making bad people wealthy and getting innocent people killed.
Yes, I know all about oxycodone, I had a roommate who sold them for a while. Had a quack doc fill him a script. Too bad he put all his potential profits up his nose, he could made a lot of money. The government is just a drug peddler: OC's, Xannybars, Valium, and debt.
I can quote sources too.
"Animal tests have revealed that extremely high doses of cannabinoids are needed to have lethal effect. This has led scientists to conclude that the ratio of the amount of cannabinoids necessary to get a person intoxicated (i.e., stoned) relative to the amount necessary to kill them is 1 to 40,000. In other words, to overdose, you would have to consume 40,000 times as much marijuana as you needed to get stoned. In contrast, the ratio for alcohol varies between 1 to 4 and 1 to 10.
Source: Cannabis and alcohol toxicity is compared in Marijuana Reconsidered, ibid., p. 227. Yearly alcohol overdoses was taken from "Drug Prohibition in the United States: Costs, Consequences, and Alternatives" by Ethan A. Nadelmann, Science, Vol 245, 1 September 1989, p. 943.
To everyone else who has the flat wrong opinion on the Marijuana debate let me state some facts. The war on Marijuana, and the war on legalizing marijuana, have been dismal failures of both policy and rational thought in every respect.
I could write a "top 50 list" but i think a "top 4" will suffice for the internetz:
1. It has not hindered the distribution of marijuana by any reasonable amount.
2. It costs billions of tax payer dollars to finance which could be going toward much more socially productive programs.
3. It imprisons thousands of non-violent offenders costing the tax payers even more money while also removing these people from the workforce.
4. It is not significantly more dangerous to the user than any other carcinogen producing substance. When you burn something, whether it be marijuana, your roasted morning coffee, or your char-grilled steak, you get carcinogens and other cancer causing by-products as a result. So save everyone the speech about the health effects of marijuana unless you're going to give a lecture on the potential health hazards of burning anything carbon based.
These facts are not debatable. You people must know this. The only potential argument you have is that the legalization of Marjuana would result in some absurd doomsday scenario where everyone turns into a lazy pothead. Unfortunately, this has not come to fruition in any country that has legalized its use. This idea that people can not control themselves without the nanny state not only gives us a window into your cynical, fearful mind, it's also completely un-American. And by the way, been to Boston recently? Marijuana has been decriminalized there since '08, and last i checked the city hasn't gone up in smoke and potato chip wrappers.
And no, I don't smoke marijuana. And fuck you for thinking I would if you didn't force me not to.
Yes, I have had that happen before. But let me get this straight. You're saying that <b>hypothetically</b> if an old man with a respiratory disease was to smoke weed, and happened to have some sort of coughing fit, he could possibly die. Therefore marijuana kills.
Not much of an argument.
This could be debated. People can drink legally and still show up to work, people who drink while at work usually won't have a job to much longer. It's not like you would be allowed to be smoking while at work. If your production goes down ( even if you are not using drugs) usually you get fired. The incentive to produce is greater than the incentive to burn a fatty in your cubicle.
some would even argue that demand would drop...yes DROP amoungst young people...
on the flip side, people on high grade coke may work 10 times more...