I ask this question because of something I saw yesterday. I saw a police officer taking away a 6 year old child for dealing drugs (obviously not a prison...6 year old kid after all). And I thought to myself, his circumstances put him in a position where he had to do that but it's not like drugs are being forced down addict's throats (almost 99% of the time at least). They have a choice and they're choosing poorly so why does the law give them a slap on the wrists and dealers a 15 year sentence? Insert economic point about supply and demand here.
sort by best latest
Actually some addicts are caught growing their own marijuana plant or creating their own meth. Sometimes around children of their own. Should this be forgiven as well because they aren't drug dealers?
I never talked about forgiving one or the other. I said that the discussion warrants more than a simple blame against drug dealers or addicts. It's a more complex problem than that.
A fair point.
Telling a teenager that something is wrong because it's illegal is like telling them to try it once so they can be a rebel and somehow act "cool". They need to have a clear, strong, and certainty of punishment to make them averse.
Do you think alcohol would be legal if it wasn't a culturally traditional drug? If it was a new drug that had just been developed it would be illegal too - the health risks are so high, the addictive qualities also.
Unitify- you have a really good argument in the name of morality
I could feel your heart in that story and I'm so sorry you had to go through that!
Quite right! Add to this the fact that taxing the sale of narcotics would more than cover the cost of medical care, rehab etc... it's a no brainer!
Landmark, I always love your answers but I would pose to you: How do I keep that redlight district out of my neighborhood? I have enough trouble keeping up with sex offenders.
I think if it were legal they would gravitate away from the areas that are not zoned for this activity and towards the ones that are. No system is perfect.. But trying to ban people from consciously harming themselves is impossible.
Couldn't have said it any better, you truly narrow it down well and nail it strongly
Without the users the drug dealers wouldn't exist though, but without the drug dealer the drug users would always find some other way to get more drugs (growing it themselves if they could).
In the uk roughly 30 people a year die after taking E. The majority of those cases involved unknown underlying health issues or other substances taken in conflict with ecstasy. Compare that to 440,000 deaths annually from tobacco smoking... thoughts?