Message from @Sq crcl
Discord ID: 640528754816319488
Not true
It depends on a lot of factors
Such as demographics, type of law, implementation of the law etc.
Im pretty sure the real world examples of prohibition and the war on drugs say otherwise
You do realize the difference between legalization of weed vs cocaine, right?
And why any apparent "failure" of war on drugs can't be translated into an argument for legalizing crystal meth?
The war on drugs is an abject failure and clearly it being illegal doesnt stop people from manufacturing and selling it or people doing it
Murder being illegal doesn't stop people from murdering either
That's a failure of the state, civic order and demographics
And those should be fixed than legalizing every degeneracy under the sun in the pursuit of abstract principles of libertarianism
its not all about libertarian values
i think legalizing certain highly addictive drugs AND providing centres like what happened in that one country really would help in some other countries
westcoast of europe for sure
all these tiny theocracies
Make drugs legal and the clinics for them private; I don't want the NHS caring for crack-addicts at the expense of the British-taxpayer every time they overdose.
Of course though, in places such as the USA where healthcare is purely private (aside from the abortion that is Obamacare), that wouldn't be an issue.
I'd also want drug-use and overdoses to be treated in the same vein as alcohol; no driving under the influence, fines for being drunk/high and causing trouble in public, etc.
What you incentives, grows. What if we incentivised self-help rather than 'free-escapism'...
Oh wait, then the gov. wouldn't be able to justify diverting funds for rehabilitation centres that sustain users to year on out growing trends...
Seems like the more money we allow faceless institutions swallowing up, the worse we are on an individual level... Who'd have 'thunk'! <:pepelaugh:544857300179877898>
I have a hard time being against this
Ford you're literally so dumb
Illegality of something doesn't stop it
The point of making things criminal is so that something *can* be done when things went *too far* in the first place
Your ethical position is that everything that remotely resembles degeneracy must be made illegal, even if it didn't actually cause added harm compared to a free society
Your mistake is to think that making things illegal *by itself* without *any nuance* turns a free society into a better one
It does not
If you lack nuance in law making then you have no place in law making
If you can't reason out your argument besides "muh degeneracy" then you have no place in law making
If your argument was compelling enough by itself then even more radically "conservative" people than you could turn your personal utopia into a nightmare even for you
Case in point, Muslim fundamentalists
Even some Christian fundamentalists would likely make life hell for you
And that'd be because your argument must be used consistently. And if it is used consistently, that's the inevitable outcome.
With a lack of nuance in our arguments we will never improve society.
As a 14-15 y/o I and a few dozen of my friends smoked dope, I myself smoked it for almost a year, and picked it up again several times later in life
We were caught by the police one day, but they didn't go hard on most of us. They only interviewed me and let me go. They even purposely set the date for my drug test to several months later so that all the toxins in my body would be swept out by that time (which almost backfired since I picked up the habit again later, but fortunately I was told how to detox in time again).
If this had been put on my criminal record, what good would that have done to me?
I can tell you: nothing
In fact it probably would've made things even worse