Does anyone still support the drug war?

[guerilla]

Not sure if serius ^^^

All of the guys who argue for government on this forum, like Kiopa_Matt, are anti-drugs. They are anti-liberty in general. It's their hypocrisy when they come into threads like this and talk about the irrationality of the drug war, CAUSED by the irrational system they support and insist is necessary!

I love how people can look at the evidence, and then deny the causality.

 

[zingo]

Portugal Decriminalized All Drugs Eleven Years Ago And The Results Are Staggering Re

This is what happens if there is no Drug War.


Portugal Drug Policy: Decriminalization Works - Business Insider

 

[d_diggler]

It's going as well as the war on hurrrrrr derrrrr derpssss, that's for sure.

Another thing that could be explained away by a 12 year old economics class.

 

[dreamache]

For a forum full of smart people you'd think they'd understand the difference between drugs like Alcohol, Xanax, etc and pot. Pot is illegal, because it's been proven scientifically to have 0 value medical value. Sure, some "doctors" have said it's good for x,y, and z illnesses, but in fact it's not. They're part of a conspiracy to get it completely legalized and unfortunately it's working.

 

[jeffrey]

For a forum full of smart people you'd think they'd understand the difference between drugs like Alcohol, Xanax, etc and pot. Pot is illegal, because it's been proven scientifically to have 0 value medical value. Sure, some "doctors" have said it's good for x,y, and z illnesses, but in fact it's not. They're part of a conspiracy to get it completely legalized and unfortunately it's working.

Strong correlation between your username and post right there.

 

[hellblazer]

The term "drug war" itself is propaganda. There's banned substances and they're banned for a reason. Contrary to what you might think after hanging around here, not everyone is a drug addict.

And the morons who say drugs only affect the user are beyond idiotic, obviously ingesting drugs is going to affect the genetics of your future children. Where's their say in the matter?

If you want to have a permanent vasectomy and relinquish your drivers license and guns, then yes you can use drugs. Otherwise, stay the hell away from them instead of acting like a selfish, self-absorbed brat.

 

[cheshire]

You can't end the drug war, what would we do with all the empty prisons in this country? How could we easily imprison black people for non violent crimes? How is the CIA going to get funding?

 

[d_diggler]

The term "drug war" itself is propaganda. There's banned substances and they're banned for a reason. Contrary to what you might think after hanging around here, not everyone is a drug addict.

And the morons who say drugs only affect the user are beyond idiotic, obviously ingesting drugs is going to affect the genetics of your future children. Where's their say in the matter?

You're missing the point derp...

I hate drugs, never touch them but prohibition creates a market, which in turn creates supply.

That's how things work.

You'll always have drug addicts, distribution via violent criminals is optional.

 

[crackp0t]

Not sure if serius ^^^

All of the guys who argue for government on this forum, like Kiopa_Matt, are anti-drugs. They are anti-liberty in general. It's their hypocrisy when they come into threads like this and talk about the irrationality of the drug war, CAUSED by the irrational system they support and insist is necessary!

I love how people can look at the evidence, and then deny the causality.

It was the best thing I could come up with. It apparently worked, because people believed me.

 

[hellblazer]

prohibition creates a market...

Does prohibition on murder create a market for murder?

You'll always have drug addicts

Who gives a fuck? Break the law, go to jail. Laws exist for a reason. You think Soros is spending millions to legalize weed because he cares about the people, sweetie?

 

[UBlack]

Exactly...good point my man. The business of chasing drugs is huge...and why the idea of legalizing drugs is always met with arguments. The main reason is many gpv't "businesses" like the DEA, etc would lose funding and they wouldn't be able to play cowboys and Indians as they like. They are not doing it for our best interests as the arguments goes....

people who sell drugs support the drug war.

 

[scottspfd82]

The term "drug war" itself is propaganda. There's banned substances and they're banned for a reason. Contrary to what you might think after hanging around here, not everyone is a drug addict.

And the morons who say drugs only affect the user are beyond idiotic, obviously ingesting drugs is going to affect the genetics of your future children. Where's their say in the matter?

If you want to have a permanent vasectomy and relinquish your drivers license and guns, then yes you can use drugs. Otherwise, stay the hell away from them instead of acting like a selfish, self-absorbed brat.

Then tell your leaders to stop selling them to people.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hz7sO-i4H1s]Ron Paul: George Bush "Deep Into" CIA Drug Trafficking - YouTube[/ame]

 

[dreamache]

The term "drug war" itself is propaganda. There's banned substances and they're banned for a reason. Contrary to what you might think after hanging around here, not everyone is a drug addict.

And the morons who say drugs only affect the user are beyond idiotic, obviously ingesting drugs is going to affect the genetics of your future children. Where's their say in the matter?

If you want to have a permanent vasectomy and relinquish your drivers license and guns, then yes you can use drugs. Otherwise, stay the hell away from them instead of acting like a selfish, self-absorbed brat.

The discussion isn't even about whether drugs are bad or not, it's about whether or not they should be legalized.

Simply put, the war on drugs is 100% ineffective at decreasing drug addiction, and it's a contributor to a significant increase in murder.

This chart here shows the fact that banning drugs / making drugs illegal is entirely ineffective at controlling drug addiction:

This one shows a direct correlation between prohibition/war on drugs and an increase in death:

So, go ahead and keep "banning" substances, and keep achieving absolutely nothing with exception to more taxes and more death.

 

[hellblazer]

Then tell your leaders to stop selling them to people.

Show me where I said that George Bush was my leader. You can't, so crawl back to HuffPo for more talking points, you sniveling little worm.

The discussion isn't even about whether drugs are bad or not, it's about whether or not they should be legalized.

To a normal brain, those would be the same question.

the enforcement of drug laws is 100% ineffective at decreasing drug addiction

it's a contributor to a significant increase in murder.

direct correlation between the enforcement of drug laws and an increase in death

Who cares? Break the law, go to jail.

With all that being said, if they wanted to deprive you or the other 99% of WF of their daily toke, they could do so instantly. They could shut down the southern border, mass the National Guard down there, and choke off every other entry point. They could burn the Afghani crops to the ground and incentivize other governments to eradicate the smugglers. But the communists who own the Democrat Party want you to be dumb and constantly drugged. And they're succeeding.

Your argument is somewhat akin to saying that since police can't prevent murder, they shouldn't jail murderers, that because the enforcement of drug laws has been executed so poorly, they shouldn't enforce them any more, that because you've sucked at disciplining your child, you should just quit entirely and let him be a complete fuckup.

It's such shockingly shitty reasoning that I'm amazed I even have to point it out. But then I remember where I am.

 

[JarredLv]

The term "drug war" itself is propaganda. There's banned substances and they're banned for a reason. Contrary to what you might think after hanging around here, not everyone is a drug addict.

And the morons who say drugs only affect the user are beyond idiotic, obviously ingesting drugs is going to affect the genetics of your future children. Where's their say in the matter?

If you want to have a permanent vasectomy and relinquish your drivers license and guns, then yes you can use drugs. Otherwise, stay the hell away from them instead of acting like a selfish, self-absorbed brat.

Does prohibition on murder create a market for murder?

Who gives a fuck? Break the law, go to jail. Laws exist for a reason. You think Soros is spending millions to legalize weed because he cares about the people, sweetie?

Who cares? Break the law, go to jail.

 

[hellblazer]

Do drugs. Look at Jarred's response. Repeat until his argument makes sense.

 

[scottspfd82]

Show me where I said that George Bush was my leader. You can't, so crawl back to HuffPo for more talking points, you sniveling little worm.

Don't worry, Obama's on-board too.

He's your democratically elected leader.

Huffpo? Right...

I will never understand your thought process or worldview, and for that I am thankful.

 

[dreamache]

Who cares? Break the law, go to jail.

Yeah, let's blindly follow every law.

With all that being said, if they wanted to deprive you or the other 99% of WF of their daily toke, they could do so instantly. They could shut down the southern border, mass the National Guard down there, and choke off every other entry point. They could burn the Afghani crops to the ground and incentivize other governments to eradicate the smugglers.

Ooooo scary!!!

Your argument is somewhat akin to saying that since police can't prevent murder, they shouldn't jail murderers, that because the enforcement of drug laws has been executed so poorly, they shouldn't enforce them any more, that because you've sucked at disciplining your child, you should just quit entirely and let him be a complete fuckup.

It's such shockingly shitty reasoning that I'm amazed I even have to point it out. But then I remember where I am.

This is your problem, the blind acceptance of any law. You're equating murder to drug use. Some laws are worth disbanding, actually, most are. It's not illegal to drink alcohol, but if you beat your wife during a drunken rampage, or you kill someone while driving drunk, there are still legal consequences, just as there should be with any other drug. There should not be any legal consequence if you're {insert any action} and you've not initiated force on any other person. Otherwise, you start going down that road, and soon enough 16oz soda's are made illegal.

It's people like you who advocate for the imprisonment of non-violent drug offenders that prevent real progress.

Edit: lol @ the disciplining my child comment. You probably discipline your wife too, right?

 

[JarredLv]

Do drugs. Look at Jarred's response. Repeat until his argument makes sense.

I guess if I wanted a government to decide every decision for me I would be more in line with your train of thought. But just to clarify one more time...is it "break law, go to jail?"

 

[crackp0t]

Show me where I said that George Bush was my leader. You can't, so crawl back to HuffPo for more talking points, you sniveling little worm.



To a normal brain, those would be the same question.



Who cares? Break the law, go to jail.

With all that being said, if they wanted to deprive you or the other 99% of WF of their daily toke, they could do so instantly. They could shut down the southern border, mass the National Guard down there, and choke off every other entry point. They could burn the Afghani crops to the ground and incentivize other governments to eradicate the smugglers. But the communists who own the Democrat Party want you to be dumb and constantly drugged. And they're succeeding.

Your argument is somewhat akin to saying that since police can't prevent murder, they shouldn't jail murderers, that because the enforcement of drug laws has been executed so poorly, they shouldn't enforce them any more, that because you've sucked at disciplining your child, you should just quit entirely and let him be a complete fuckup.

It's such shockingly shitty reasoning that I'm amazed I even have to point it out. But then I remember where I am.

If you cut off all drug import it would increase domestic production. Look at meth production. It was primarily a domestic product until all of the laws were put in place to curb it. Since then it moved to Mexico. Why wouldn't it work in reverse?

EDIT:

Just in case anyone is wondering I'm not saying we should legalize meth.