Harvard Economics Professor Jeffrey Miron says Legalize ALL *****

[HELLRAISER]

The War on ***** has proven to be an epic failure yet trillions of taxpayers dollars is pissed away to prohibit *****

Video:
http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticke...-Says?sec=topStories&pos=9&asset&ccode&ref=nf

Just Say "Yes!" Legalizing ***** Is Good for Society ... and the Economy, Harvard Prof. Says

Posted Oct 06, 2010 10:06am EDT by Henry Blodget

California residents will vote in November on whether or not to legalize *********. If they do vote "yes," says Harvard economics professor Jeffrey Miron, that should only be the beginning.

All ***** should be legalized nationwide, Miron says. Pot, *******, LSD, crystal-meth --- you name it.

"Legalizing ***** would save roughly $41.3 billion per year in government expenditure on enforcement of prohibition. Of these savings, $25.7 billion would accrue to state and local governments, while $15.6 billion would accrue to the federal government," Miron claims in a recent Cato Institute report he co-authored.

According to their website, "The report also estimates that **** legalization would yield tax revenue of $46.7 billion annually, assuming legal ***** were taxed at rates comparable to those on ******* and tobacco. Approximately $8.7 billion of this revenue would result from legalization of ********* and $38.0 billion from legalization of other *****."

But won't we become a nation of **** addicts?

No, says Miron. Walk down any city street and you can already buy legal ***** in multiple establishments: Caffeine at Starbucks, nicotine at the supermarket, ******* at bars and restaurants. And we're not ALL addicted to all of these *****.

Our current **** policy doesn't work, Miron observes. Despite ~$40 billion spent on enforcement and prosecution, **** use is still widespread. Meanwhile, because the products are *******, they're dangerous, low-quality, and unregulated, and they generate zero tax revenue.

Legalizing ***** would solve those problems, Miron says. It would help close the budget deficit. And it would eliminate a bizarre double standard, in which Americans are encouraged to ***** and smoke themselves to death -- while guzzling addictive coffee and tea -- but become criminals if they dare to get stoned.

By the way, here are 10 ways to invest in the ****-legalization trend >

 

[ForumModeregulator]

An estimated 20% of the US population ****** ************ (legal) *****, and 65% increase in hospitalizations/overdoses in the past seven years (Scientific American) http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=************-****-deaths...

why add more fuel to the fire by legalizing even MORE dangerous *****? If we can not even control the ***** we have that are already legal, how do we expect society to realistically handle legalized meth and *******?

So many reasons why this is not a good idea...but im just too tired...

Just read this and truly understand that while maybe you are responsible enough, ***** cause problems and ARE not healthy.

http://drugabuse.gov/Infofacts/understand.html


And this is my main point, why the fuck should we be taking advice from an economist when it comes to *****? I would think doctors are more qualified on the subject at hand. I dont need some guy telling me how to make money, when its clearly presents a problem for the health of society as a whole. It shouldnt be profit over health...

 

[Hot Mega]

An estimated 20% of the US population ****** ************ (legal) *****, and 65% increase in hospitalizations/overdoses in the past seven years (Scientific American) http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=************-****-deaths...

why add more fuel to the fire by legalizing even MORE dangerous *****? If we can not even control the ***** we have that are already legal, how do we expect society to realistically handle legalized meth and *******?

So many reasons why this is not a good idea...but im just too tired...

Just read this and truly understand that while maybe you are responsible enough, ***** cause problems and ARE not healthy.

http://drugabuse.gov/Infofacts/understand.html


And this is my main point, why the fuck should we be taking advice from an economist when it comes to *****? I would think doctors are more qualified on the subject at hand. I dont need some guy telling me how to make money, when its clearly presents a problem for the health of society as a whole. It shouldnt be profit over health...

Where ever there is a thing (anything) there is a human being that will ***** it.

The point you seem to be missing is we shouldn't be criminalizing everyone just to "protect" the weak. Especially when the policy isn't stopping those who want this stuff anyway.

Making the case that people ***** legal ***** to support the case against legalization is circular IMO. It's still ******* to ***** legal *****...well, ******* to have legal ***** without prescriptions for them. There are people who ***** this **** who don't become addicts as propensity to addiction is allegedly genetic according to the DSM IV.

Everyone knows ******* ***** are dangerous. The people who get hooked on legal ***** do so because there is a perception that they're safe (in spite of addiction warnings), there is a perception that a habit or addiction to them doesn't carry the same stigma as ***** "junkies" are addicted to and the perception is an addiction to legal ***** isn't as debilitating as ***** "junkies" are normally addicted to. Also, addiction to legal ***** is usually accidental. Meaning, the ****** has some condition which causes the ***** of the **** to relieve pain or whatever then they become addicted...not necessarily for the high.

You can't ban people into protecting themselves.

 

[ForumModeregulator]

Your right, but that still doesn't justify making such harmful ***** even more readily available for public consumption does it? That's what I dont get. I understand that ***** are used. I believe that it is very hypocritical to allow the government to tell us what ***** to take and what ones not to (especially since so many "legal" ***** are proven later to be harmful), and I really see how legalizing ***** seems so appealing. Maybe its because I am so pessimistic about human responsibility, maybe its because I have seen so many first hand accounts of **** usage, but in the end I see no benefit from making all these ******* ***** legal.


This is kind of how I feel...

"The rationale is: *************** does not work, and **** treatment should be provided in lieu of jail for **** users.

Why do we buy into the illogical "red-herring rhetoric," pervading the print media today, that declares **** laws and **** *************** as the problem? **** use and its consequences are the problem, not the laws or incarceration.

The vast majority of **** users who are in jail are there for ****-related crimes, such as theft, burglary, forgery, etc. Most are repeat offenders who have previously been offered treatment and probation in lieu of jail and continue to break the law to fund their **** habits.

**** education, treatment and *************** make up the "three-legged stool" that addresses the problem of **** use in America today. These efforts must be mutually supported, not only by the professionals who have expertise in these areas, but also by the media and the public.

The most effective treatment programs we have in this country today are "sanctions based," i.e., go to jail or enter treatment. This concept is integral to **** Court here in Pima County. Without the threat of sanctions, most hardcore addicts do not seek treatment. This is a fact.

I offer the following on why **** legalization should not be considered:

* **** use and **** addiction in America will increase substantially. Do we want our commercial pilots, heart surgeons, teachers, police officers and legislators to be ************* or impaired while carrying out their job duties? If ***** were legalized, workplace **** use restrictions would become moot.

* What do parents do when their ******** announce they have made the personal decision to use *****? Don't think for a minute that the solution here would be a minimum age restriction. The black market would prevail.

* The highway carnage inflicted by ***** drivers will substantially increase by adding **** users into this mix. Additional costs and complications would accrue to our over-burdened criminal justice system.

* **** treatment and education programs would be well-funded, but oxymoronic, in view of a legalized **** environment with no consequences.

Our public schools will continue to deteriorate, and high-tech companies will not be able to staff their payrolls with qualified workers. Our military strength and international leadership will be drastically weakened, as well.

In an America where ***** are legalized, either the government or private enterprise would supply the ***** - at a dollar cost, of course.

Either would be sued for product liability in a manner similar to the tobacco debacle, and more **** users will commit crimes to get money to buy *****. Please don't suggest the federal government ( i.e., taxpayers ) provide the ***** free of charge!

There is no "sound bite" solution to the **** problem in this country, nor is there any benefit or logic to demonizing ***************.

We can legitimately debate the amount of money and emphasis that should be spent in each of the three disciplines of education, treatment and enforcement, but all three must be mutually supported. We should be open to "alternative" strategies to add to this arsenal, as long as these proposals are designed to reduce **** use in America, not increase it.

In my view, the objective is to give our **** the best possible private or public education we can provide.

They need to see and learn principles of integrity and character, which include being responsible and accountable for their actions. I see no place for legalized **** use in this equation." - William R. Coonce, deputy director of the Arizona High Intensity **** Trafficking program.

In essence, **** usage and the effects are the true issues. Nothing to do with "the man" telling us what to do, or how to live our lives. Just plain and simple. People need to know ***** are harmful, and how to deal with them.

 

[ForumModeregulator]

Also, addiction to legal ***** is usually accidental. Meaning, the ****** has some condition which causes the ***** of the **** to relieve pain or whatever then they become addicted...not necessarily for the high.

You can't ban people into protecting themselves.

haha, if you read that article from Scientific American there is a part titled "no accident"...

"Poisonings, from ************ ***** and other substances, are classified in medical records as injurious or accidental deaths. But regardless of whether the incidents are listed as unintentional or intentional, they are rarely true mistakes, noted Leonard Paulozzi, a medical epidemiologist with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in congressional testimony in 2007. "Most unintentional **** poisoning deaths are not 'accidents' caused by toddlers or the elderly taking too much medication," he noted. "These deaths are largely due to the misuse and ***** of ************ *****."

Accidents overall were the fifth most common cause of death in the U.S. as of 2005 (accounting for 117,809 deaths—4.8 percent—that year), according to the National Vital Statistics Report [pdf]. Of injury deaths, poisoning is the second most common cause of death in the U.S., having doubled between 1985 and 2004, according to a 2007 Department of Health and Human Services analysis [pdf]. Among people 35 to 54 years old, poisoning is the most common accidental death—even more so than auto-related deaths.

Many experts think that the sheer prevalence of many of these ***** recently has contributed to the drastic increase in poisonings. Although growing ******* markets and distribution of these ***** might be a driving factor in their increasingly large role in poisonings and deaths, perfectly legal prescriptions are probably playing a role as well, Coben says."

 

[BigSwede]

He must have been stoned when he said that....

 

[Hot Mega]

Your right, but that still doesn't justify making such harmful ***** even more readily available for public consumption does it? That's what I dont get. I understand that ***** are used. I believe that it is very hypocritical to allow the government to tell us what ***** to take and what ones not to (especially since so many "legal" ***** are proven later to be harmful), and I really see how legalizing ***** seems so appealing. Maybe its because I am so pessimistic about human responsibility, maybe its because I have seen so many first hand accounts of **** usage, but in the end I see no benefit from making all these ******* ***** legal.


This is kind of how I feel...

"The rationale is: *************** does not work, and **** treatment should be provided in lieu of jail for **** users.

Why do we buy into the illogical "red-herring rhetoric," pervading the print media today, that declares **** laws and **** *************** as the problem? **** use and its consequences are the problem, not the laws or incarceration.

The vast majority of **** users who are in jail are there for ****-related crimes, such as theft, burglary, forgery, etc. Most are repeat offenders who have previously been offered treatment and probation in lieu of jail and continue to break the law to fund their **** habits.

**** education, treatment and *************** make up the "three-legged stool" that addresses the problem of **** use in America today. These efforts must be mutually supported, not only by the professionals who have expertise in these areas, but also by the media and the public.

The most effective treatment programs we have in this country today are "sanctions based," i.e., go to jail or enter treatment. This concept is integral to **** Court here in Pima County. Without the threat of sanctions, most hardcore addicts do not seek treatment. This is a fact.

I offer the following on why **** legalization should not be considered:

* **** use and **** addiction in America will increase substantially. Do we want our commercial pilots, heart surgeons, teachers, police officers and legislators to be ************* or impaired while carrying out their job duties? If ***** were legalized, workplace **** use restrictions would become moot.

* What do parents do when their ******** announce they have made the personal decision to use *****? Don't think for a minute that the solution here would be a minimum age restriction. The black market would prevail.

* The highway carnage inflicted by ***** drivers will substantially increase by adding **** users into this mix. Additional costs and complications would accrue to our over-burdened criminal justice system.

* **** treatment and education programs would be well-funded, but oxymoronic, in view of a legalized **** environment with no consequences.

Our public schools will continue to deteriorate, and high-tech companies will not be able to staff their payrolls with qualified workers. Our military strength and international leadership will be drastically weakened, as well.

In an America where ***** are legalized, either the government or private enterprise would supply the ***** - at a dollar cost, of course.

Either would be sued for product liability in a manner similar to the tobacco debacle, and more **** users will commit crimes to get money to buy *****. Please don't suggest the federal government ( i.e., taxpayers ) provide the ***** free of charge!

There is no "sound bite" solution to the **** problem in this country, nor is there any benefit or logic to demonizing ***************.

We can legitimately debate the amount of money and emphasis that should be spent in each of the three disciplines of education, treatment and enforcement, but all three must be mutually supported. We should be open to "alternative" strategies to add to this arsenal, as long as these proposals are designed to reduce **** use in America, not increase it.

In my view, the objective is to give our **** the best possible private or public education we can provide.

They need to see and learn principles of integrity and character, which include being responsible and accountable for their actions. I see no place for legalized **** use in this equation." - William R. Coonce, deputy director of the Arizona High Intensity **** Trafficking program.

In essence, **** usage and the effects are the true issues. Nothing to do with "the man" telling us what to do, or how to live our lives. Just plain and simple. People need to know ***** are harmful, and how to deal with them.

I'm not muddling through all that gibberish. I suspect in there are references to the dangers and blah blah blah. That stuff is enlightening to no one. Everyone KNOWS the potential harms.

Besides, you're making cases against arguments that haven't been made. Arguing they should be legal (i.e. just not *******) isn't a case for making them "available". Who knows...some of the **** might just go or dwindle away without a black market...

haha, if you read that article from Scientific American there is a part titled "no accident"...

"Poisonings, from ************ ***** and other substances, are classified in medical records as injurious or accidental deaths. But regardless of whether the incidents are listed as unintentional or intentional, they are rarely true mistakes, noted Leonard Paulozzi, a medical epidemiologist with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in congressional testimony in 2007. "Most unintentional **** poisoning deaths are not 'accidents' caused by toddlers or the elderly taking too much medication," he noted. "These deaths are largely due to the misuse and ***** of ************ *****."

Accidents overall were the fifth most common cause of death in the U.S. as of 2005 (accounting for 117,809 deaths—4.8 percent—that year), according to the National Vital Statistics Report [pdf]. Of injury deaths, poisoning is the second most common cause of death in the U.S., having doubled between 1985 and 2004, according to a 2007 Department of Health and Human Services analysis [pdf]. Among people 35 to 54 years old, poisoning is the most common accidental death—even more so than auto-related deaths.

Many experts think that the sheer prevalence of many of these ***** recently has contributed to the drastic increase in poisonings. Although growing ******* markets and distribution of these ***** might be a driving factor in their increasingly large role in poisonings and deaths, perfectly legal prescriptions are probably playing a role as well, Coben says."

Who said anything about accidental deaths and overdoses? I said becoming addicted (to things like painkillers) is mostly accidental. Well, all addictions are likely accidental..I don't think anyone sets out to be an addict.

What I mean is ************ addiction is accidental because most don't take serious the potential for addiction to these things.

Most people understand there is some likelihood of addiction to illicit ***** and that causes people to stay away from them.

No one is going to steer clear of Vicodine if their doctor prescribes it out of fear of addiction.

Again, the case you make here is not really relevant.

 

[ForumModeregulator]

overdoses and addictions are related. If your logic is that addiction is mostly accidental (because nobody sets out to be an addict) than are deaths "accidental" too? Thats my point, if we can not even properly educate or control addictions/overdoes/deaths with "legal" ************ *****, how are we going to handle the addition of street narcotics?

And I guess most importantly, if my information is too boring for you...How is legalizing ***** beneficial for society, other than the potential profits for the government? ********, tobacco, and *******, the government is already profiting off of the people's addictions, why add *****?

How would the integration of these ***** even work? Why pay to go see a doctor and get a ************ for OxyContin, when you can just go to wal-mart and pick up some Heroin?...If these street level ***** are only going to be available on a medical need (which would be ridiculous, there are no medical benefits from most of the illicit narcs) then the black market would still exist. having them readily available would eliminate and/or cause havoc on the system of ***** already in place...So how would it work anyways?

 

[Hot Mega]

overdoses and addictions are related. If your logic is that addiction is mostly accidental (because nobody sets out to be an addict) than are deaths "accidental" too? Thats my point, if we can not even properly educate or control addictions/overdoes/deaths with "legal" ************ *****, how are we going to handle the addition of street narcotics?

People take both legal and ******* ***** knowingly..but for different reasons. Most people who become addicted to ************ ***** don't take them seeking to get high. Most if not 100 pct. of people who take street ***** take them to get high. What does that distinction mean to you in the context of this discussion?

And proper education doesn't mean you still won't have people who do what they want. There are signs all over our freeways that say 65 mph. Why do people still go 120 on them? Should we ban driving or cars because some can't exercise responsible behavior?

And I guess most importantly, if my information is too boring for you...How is legalizing ***** beneficial for society, other than the potential profits for the government? ********, tobacco, and *******, the government is already profiting off of the people's addictions, why add *****?

The A-No.1 benefit to society is we're not criminalizing people for personal choices unless their personal choices directly or proximately cause harm or loss to others.

 

[ForumModeregulator]

People take both legal and ******* ***** knowingly..but for different reasons. Most people who become addicted to ************ ***** don't take them seeking to get high. Most if not 100 pct. of people who take street ***** take them to get high. What does that distinction mean to you in the context of this discussion?

And proper education doesn't mean you still won't have people who do what they want. There are signs all over our freeways that say 65 mph. Why do people still go 120 on them? Should we ban driving or cars because some can't exercise responsible behavior?


The A-No.1 benefit to society is we're not criminalizing people for personal choices unless their personal choices directly or proximately cause harm or loss to others.

You are wrong. ************ **** ******* ARE trying to get high. Thats why it's *****...The point I am making is that since it is quite obvious that the legal ************ ***** are a problem already. Doctors are over prescribing, and people are RAMPANTLY ******* ************ ***** to get high, or becoming addicted. That being said, it is very relevant to understanding how the introduction of more dangerous ***** to the legal market would have an impact of the health of society.

As far as the "personal choice" benefit...

People and their rights don’t exist in a vacuum. The notion that ***** only hurt the people who use them is very shallow and illogical. One needs to look beyond themselves and look at the entire picture, and it becomes obvious that ***** have drastic effects on MANY people besides those who use them.

Don't tell me that ***** only hurt the user - Tell that to a crack baby. Tell that to a woman who is ***** by her boyfriend while he was high on PCP. Or tell that to the six year old that is ***** by that same guy....Tell that to the taxpayers who will be paying out the wazoo for higher insurance rates, more taxes for **** rehabilitation programs, and more money for court cases due to the increased number of **** related offenses.

Please don't tell me that ***** hurt only the person who chooses to use them - that's not true.


READ THIS if you dont believe my rant...

http://www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs11/18862/impact.htm

And again, how could government justify making you get a ************ for certain *****, while other (more dangerous) ***** are available otc? It just wouldn't work...so making ***** legal, would require a massive overhaul of the current **** system in place...good luck with that...

 

[Hot Mega]

You are wrong. ************ **** ******* ARE trying to get high. Thats why it's *****...The point I am making is that since it is quite obvious that the legal ************ ***** are a problem already. Doctors are over prescribing, and people are RAMPANTLY ******* ************ ***** to get high, or becoming addicted. That being said, it is very relevant to understanding how the introduction of more dangerous ***** to the legal market would have an impact of the health of society.

There are those who seek to get high and ************ ***** is just one of many they chose to *****. That's different. Those are people who are getting high in any event. But the person who becomes addicted from overuse of a ************ isn't looking to ***** the **** and likely has no interest in getting high.

The psychological dependence created from using a **** that stops a pain is a natural thing. Whenever a person can go from one state of being to another by using a pill poses the likelihood of them becoming psychologically dependent on it even if they don't need it.

For example, if you have a cock that works okay most of the time simply because you're out of shape or don't eat right...the last thing you should do is use viagra (or whatever) because you will likely become psychologically dependent on it.

As far as the "personal choice" benefit...

People and their rights don’t exist in a vacuum. The notion that ***** only hurt the people who use them is very shallow and illogical. One needs to look beyond themselves and look at the entire picture, and it becomes obvious that ***** have drastic effects on MANY people besides those who use them.

Don't tell me that ***** only hurt the user - Tell that to a crack baby. Tell that to a woman who is ***** by her boyfriend while he was high on PCP. Or tell that to the six year old that is ***** by that same guy....Tell that to the taxpayers who will be paying out the wazoo for higher insurance rates, more taxes for **** rehabilitation programs, and more money for court cases due to the increased number of **** related offenses.

Please don't tell me that ***** hurt only the person who chooses to use them - that's not true.


READ THIS if you dont believe my rant...

http://www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs11/18862/impact.htm

And again, how could government justify making you get a ************ for certain *****, while other (more dangerous) ***** are available otc? It just wouldn't work...so making ***** legal, would require a massive overhaul of the current **** system in place...good luck with that...

We're not going to agree. You're positions are pretty one dimensional and somewhat naive. I imagine you think the same of my arguments.

The instances you cite above are ******* and despicable no matter what causes it. The fact that they occur STILL while we waste billions trying to stop **** ***** is the bigger crime.

We'd be much better off using a fraction of what we're wasting on interdiction on those who want treatment than wasting it trying to keep it out of the hands of those who are determined to get it.

Crack babies and people harmed by **** induced actions don't convince me in the least because those cases are irrelevant to the point.

We don't live in a perfect world...you seem to think legalizing **** that people are already getting at their whim will make the world less perfect. That is utterly one dimensional, short sighted thinking IMO.

You seem to believe most people aren't doing ***** because the law is stopping them. I believe most people aren't doing them because it's not in their interests and whether they're legal or not has little bearing on it.

In spite of ******* being legal and even marketed there are those who don't ***** it or don't even ***** at all. In spite of cigarettes being legal and even marketed there are those who don't smoke them...all this in spite of the fact that many sources cite both ******* and nicotine as more addictive than some hard core illicit *****.

Let me ask you...you claimed to have experience with illicit ***** (and I don't doubt this at all:o) assuming you're not addicted, why didn't you become addicted?

 

[ForumModeregulator]

There are those who seek to get high and ************ ***** is just one of many they chose to *****. That's different. Those are people who are getting high in any event. But the person who becomes addicted from overuse of a ************ isn't looking to ***** the **** and likely has no interest in getting high.

The psychological dependence created from using a **** that stops a pain is a natural thing. Whenever a person can go from one state of being to another by using a pill poses the likelihood of them becoming psychologically dependent on it even if they don't need it.

For example, if you have a cock that works okay most of the time simply because you're out of shape or don't eat right...the last thing you should do is use viagra (or whatever) because you will likely become psychologically dependent on it.


We're not going to agree. You're positions are pretty one dimensional and somewhat naive. I imagine you think the same of my arguments.

The instances you cite above are ******* and despicable no matter what causes it. The fact that they occur STILL while we waste billions trying to stop **** ***** is the bigger crime.

We'd be much better off using a fraction of what we're wasting on interdiction on those who want treatment than wasting it trying to keep it out of the hands of those who are determined to get it.

Crack babies and people harmed by **** induced actions don't convince me in the least because those cases are irrelevant to the point.

We don't live in a perfect world...you seem to think legalizing **** that people are already getting at their whim will make the world less perfect. That is utterly one dimensional, short sighted thinking IMO.

You seem to believe most people aren't doing ***** because the law is stopping them. I believe most people aren't doing them because it's not in their interests and whether they're legal or not has little bearing on it.

In spite of ******* being legal and even marketed there are those who don't ***** it or don't even ***** at all. In spite of cigarettes being legal and even marketed there are those who don't smoke them...all this in spite of the fact that many sources cite both ******* and nicotine as more addictive than some hard core illicit *****.

Let me ask you...you claimed to have experience with illicit ***** (and I don't doubt this at all:o) assuming you're not addicted, why didn't you become addicted?

Commonly ****** ************ medications are usually Opioids and stimulants, as well as CNS depressants. those medications are certainly used to get high...

Its shortsighted and naive to believe that making street narcotics READILY AVAILABLE AND CHEAP is going to have a beneficial impact on society. Im not saying legalizing ***** is going to make people do *****. But its going to give them the opportunity to do so. And I am an adult. I know the ramifications and choices that are out there for me. But as a *****, how are they going to be impacted in a society where getting high is as easy as running to the local **** store? Thats the population we have to be worried about. You give people too much benefit of the doubt. not everybody out there is as educated or wise as you or I, and therefore are subject to the awful side of **** *****.

Again get out of the vacuum and step into reality. **** ***** effects society as a whole, its something that can happen to anybody.

 

[Legzman]

I've been saying legalize all ***** for years now! Legalize em, regulate em like ******* and tobacco. Tax em fairly, and reap huge rewards. Then educate ******** on the effects of said *****. They gonna try em regardless of if they're legal or not. At least this way people won't get ****** in the process of getting the ***** to people.

 

[Hot Mega]

Commonly ****** ************ medications are usually Opioids and stimulants, as well as CNS depressants. those medications are certainly used to get high...

Its shortsighted and naive to believe that making street narcotics READILY AVAILABLE AND CHEAP is going to have a beneficial impact on society. Im not saying legalizing ***** is going to make people do *****. But its going to give them the opportunity to do so. And I am an adult. I know the ramifications and choices that are out there for me. But as a *****, how are they going to be impacted in a society where getting high is as easy as running to the local **** store? Thats the population we have to be worried about. You give people too much benefit of the doubt. not everybody out there is as educated or wise as you or I, and therefore are subject to the awful side of **** *****.

Again get out of the vacuum and step into reality. **** ***** effects society as a whole, its something that can happen to anybody.

We live in a "free" country. You can be a Bill Gates if you can, you can be a bum if you want. Trying to prevent people from getting things they are bent on getting in order to spare them their own demise is silly IMO and a waste of time.

I don't give nor take credit...I assume we live in an imperfect world where a percentage of people will do dangerous, ill advised things no matter what the law is. Some will cope with it some won't. The main thing is the majority won't no matter what the law is.

I haven't made a single statement where I argued legalization would make ***** "readily available and cheap". You're the only person in any of these threads who keeps inexplicably throwing around the word "available".

In an age where cigarette manufacturers are being sued and having to committed to all sorts of g'ment anal *****..what reputable manufacturer is going to produce and make "available" ***** that are inherently addictive and unsafe???

You're not living in a real world believing that.

Besides, the point is to stop criminalizing otherwise law-abiding people.

 

[thepornguy]

I'm all for legalizing pot but I'm against legalizing "all *****". Pot doesn't lead people to commit moral turpitudes (doesn't lead people to harm each other), but ***** like heroin and crack ******* do, by, for instance, leading people to rob and burglarize to support their addictions.

 

[Jagger69]

I've been saying legalize all ***** for years now! Legalize em, regulate em like ******* and tobacco. Tax em fairly, and reap huge rewards. Then educate ******** on the effects of said *****. They gonna try em regardless of if they're legal or not. At least this way people won't get ****** in the process of getting the ***** to people.

This subject has been discussed many times on this forum. The reality of the situation is that if a demand for ***** is created, there will be a supply provided whether legal or *******. This truism has been proven over and over again throughout history through other examples such as ********, prostitution, etc. The billions of dollars ****** every year on the insipid "war on *****" is mindless and strictly in place for "show" by reactionary "law and order" politicians who love to brag about their support for ***************'s efforts to keep ***** off our streets whenever they are running for re-election. It's a total sham. In the meantime, more and more ***** are being brought into the country much to the financial benefit of organized crime and no one else. In fact, there is practically open warfare being waged in Mexico right now over control of the **** trade by such thugs with hundreds of people being gunned down in the process. Legalize them, tax them, regulate them and the whole of society benefits.

I'm all for legalizing pot but I'm against legalizing "all *****". Pot doesn't lead people to commit moral turpitudes (doesn't lead people to harm each other), but ***** like heroin and crack ******* do, by, for instance, leading people to rob and burglarize to support their addictions.

Another fallacy. It's the extreme street cost of ******* ***** like heroin that cause addicts to rob and burglarize. Once legalized, just like *******, these ***** would be available at more reasonable prices that would preclude the need for such activities in order to support an addiction. You don't normally see alcoholics robbing people just to buy another bottle of **** and you wouldn't see heroin addicts doing it either if they didn't have to.

 

[Hot Mega]

This subject has been discussed many times on this forum. The reality of the situation is that if a demand for ***** is created, there will be a supply provided whether legal or *******. This truism has been proven over and over again throughout history through other examples such as ********, prostitution, etc. The billions of dollars ****** every year on the insipid "war on *****" is mindless and strictly in place for "show" by reactionary "law and order" politicians who love to brag about their support for ***************'s efforts to keep ***** off our streets whenever they are running for re-election. It's a total sham. In the meantime, more and more ***** are being brought into the country much to the financial benefit of organized crime and no one else. In fact, there is practically open warfare being waged in Mexico right now over control of the **** trade by such thugs with hundreds of people being gunned down in the process. Legalize them, tax them, regulate them and the whole of society benefits.



Another fallacy. It's the extreme street cost of ******* ***** like heroin that cause addicts to rob and burglarize. Once legalized, just like *******, these ***** would be available at more reasonable prices that would preclude the need for such activities in order to support an addiction. You don't normally see alcoholics robbing people just to buy another bottle of **** and you wouldn't see heroin addicts doing it either if they didn't have to.

"...and that ball is outta here!!" :clap:

 

[ace.venturer]

Make it happen, baby. :2 cents:

 

[jjo_is4]

This subject has been discussed many times on this forum. The reality of the situation is that if a demand for ***** is created, there will be a supply provided whether legal or *******. This truism has been proven over and over again throughout history through other examples such as ********, prostitution, etc. The billions of dollars ****** every year on the insipid "war on *****" is mindless and strictly in place for "show" by reactionary "law and order" politicians who love to brag about their support for ***************'s efforts to keep ***** off our streets whenever they are running for re-election. It's a total sham. In the meantime, more and more ***** are being brought into the country much to the financial benefit of organized crime and no one else. In fact, there is practically open warfare being waged in Mexico right now over control of the **** trade by such thugs with hundreds of people being gunned down in the process. Legalize them, tax them, regulate them and the whole of society benefits.

Another fallacy. It's the extreme street cost of ******* ***** like heroin that cause addicts to rob and burglarize. Once legalized, just like *******, these ***** would be available at more reasonable prices that would preclude the need for such activities in order to support an addiction. You don't normally see alcoholics robbing people just to buy another bottle of **** and you wouldn't see heroin addicts doing it either if they didn't have to.

:glugglug::glugglug:

Jagger for President. You'd get my vote if I was American.
Just don't ban rap music.

 

[ForumModeregulator]

We live in a "free" country. You can be a Bill Gates if you can, you can be a bum if you want. Trying to prevent people from getting things they are bent on getting in order to spare them their own demise is silly IMO and a waste of time.

I don't give nor take credit...I assume we live in an imperfect world where a percentage of people will do dangerous, ill advised things no matter what the law is. Some will cope with it some won't. The main thing is the majority won't no matter what the law is.

I haven't made a single statement where I argued legalization would make ***** "readily available and cheap". You're the only person in any of these threads who keeps inexplicably throwing around the word "available".

In an age where cigarette manufacturers are being sued and having to committed to all sorts of g'ment anal *****..what reputable manufacturer is going to produce and make "available" ***** that are inherently addictive and unsafe???

You're not living in a real world believing that.

Besides, the point is to stop criminalizing otherwise law-abiding people.

I dont know if you can trust these statistics, but whatever...lax control/legalization correlates to higher rates of **** usage...

http://www.justice.gov/dea/demand/speakout/06so.htm

This subject has been discussed many times on this forum. The reality of the situation is that if a demand for ***** is created, there will be a supply provided whether legal or *******. This truism has been proven over and over again throughout history through other examples such as ********, prostitution, etc. The billions of dollars ****** every year on the insipid "war on *****" is mindless and strictly in place for "show" by reactionary "law and order" politicians who love to brag about their support for ***************'s efforts to keep ***** off our streets whenever they are running for re-election. It's a total sham. In the meantime, more and more ***** are being brought into the country much to the financial benefit of organized crime and no one else. In fact, there is practically open warfare being waged in Mexico right now over control of the **** trade by such thugs with hundreds of people being gunned down in the process. Legalize them, tax them, regulate them and the whole of society benefits.



Another fallacy. It's the extreme street cost of ******* ***** like heroin that cause addicts to rob and burglarize. Once legalized, just like *******, these ***** would be available at more reasonable prices that would preclude the need for such activities in order to support an addiction. You don't normally see alcoholics robbing people just to buy another bottle of **** and you wouldn't see heroin addicts doing it either if they didn't have to.

Look at actual data dealing with REAL criminals (not just ones you hear about on the news). I say this because I live with criminals, I see criminals, and I know what they are like. Again, I dont know if you are going to trust the source...but

Conclusion

The evidence indicates that **** users are more likely than nonusers to commit crimes, that arrestees frequently were under the influence of a **** at the time they committed their offense, and that ***** generate ********. Assessing the nature and extent of the influence of ***** on crime requires that reliable information about the offense and the offender be available and that definitions be consistent. In the face of problematic evidence, it is impossible to say quantitatively how much ***** influence the occurrence of crime."

http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/factsht/crime/index.html

So I guess it's safe to say, that none of us know what the "right" thing to do ...