Drug users and tax payers. Is it time to make the pushers pay for the party?

[The Man]

Do you see alcohol sellers in the school yards?

Have you ever read an actual official government report?

http://books.google.ca/books?id=L_5...wAg#v=onepage&q=ledain royal cannabis&f=false

If you do not like this one, then the Laguardia report or the California one are also quite good.

Regards
DL

Not even going to read it GIA.

Lets try this the easy way...how is the legalization of a controlled substance and taxing the dealers going to reduce drug usage by children.
Remember if it is legal the price will go down...thus more children can afford it
If it becomes legal it becomes more abundant ...thus more available for the children..in addition to the lower price.
If it becomes legal..more children will see less wrong with using it...and thus more will use it

Please break how your proposition will aid in the reduction of drug usage by children.

 

[Alien Allen]

Not even going to read it GIA.

Lets try this the easy way...how is the legalization of a controlled substance and taxing the dealers going to reduce drug usage by children.
Remember if it is legal the price will go down...thus more children can afford it
If it becomes legal it becomes more abundant ...thus more available for the children..in addition to the lower price.
If it becomes legal..more children will see less wrong with using it...and thus more will use it

Please break how your proposition will aid in the reduction of drug usage by children.

all those arguments applied to booze. eventually it became obvious that making it illegal did more harm than legalizing. Drug dealers would be put out of business for the most part. Same as moonshiners were... for the most part.

Keeping it criminal is criminal and ignores history.

 

[The Man]

all those arguments applied to booze. eventually it became obvious that making it illegal did more harm than legalizing. Drug dealers would be put out of business for the most part. Same as moonshiners were... for the most part.

Keeping it criminal is criminal and ignores history.

How is making it legal going to put dealers out of bussiness

 

[Accountable]

How is making it legal going to put dealers out of bussiness

It won't. It'll make them legitimate, just like the bootleggers.

 

[Stone]

all those arguments applied to booze. eventually it became obvious that making it illegal did more harm than legalizing. Drug dealers would be put out of business for the most part. Same as moonshiners were... for the most part.

Keeping it criminal is criminal and ignores history.

Organized crime did not go away after Prohibition ended.

Drug dealers would be put out of business for the most part.

There is no evidence to support that claim.
No logic either.
Tax avoidance is reason enough to continue the illegal sale of pot.

Same as moonshiners were... for the most part.

You are confused. Ending Prohibition didn't slow down moonshining.
The Feds attempt to because moonshiners weren't paying tax on the product.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...2007/10/why_is_moonshine_against_the_law.html
And moonshiners are still making shine

Keeping it criminal is criminal and ignores history.

That is a good reason to decriminalize drug abuse, but not legalize it's sale.

 

[Alien Allen]

gee I had no idea moonshining was still big business.

I never said organized crime disappeared. But they sure did go onto other things than booze ..... for the most part

 

[Stone]

gee I had no idea moonshining was still big business.

I never said organized crime disappeared. But they sure did go onto other things than booze ..... for the most part

I had no idea............

Agreed

I never said organized crime disappeared.

Then by your logic, there was no reason to end Prohibition.
I bothered to look up alcohol consumption during Prohibition. I posted this before.
It declined.

 

[Accountable]

It's amazing that in all this conversation, liberty and free choice is never mentioned. It's like all three of you know better what people should do than the people themselves.

What about freedom?

 

[Stone]

It's amazing that in all this conversation, liberty and free choice is never mentioned. It's like all three of you know better what people should do than the people themselves.

What about freedom?

What about freedom

It has it's limits.
Society makes those decisions by enacting laws.

Your argument allows the freedom to yell 'Fire!' in a crowded theater when there is no fire.
Society currently rejects your position, as an absolute, for it's own protection.

Same with drug abuse.

And I should point out that your libertarian position is also an argument for chaos bordering on anarchy where unrestricted freedoms can become mechanisms to rationalize antisocial behavior.

 

[retro]

Lies.

Get the quote or be known for lying.

Regards
DL

That's a pathetic response... even for you.

 

[The Man]

Come on people...Why not just argue.."Why cant I smoke pot anytime I want..who is the Govt to say I cant"
Rather than attempting to propose that the children will be better off etc

Kind of reminds me of the abortion arguments.

Why not just say..."aint no kid going to cramp my life if I dont want it"
Rather than all the other bullshit

 

[The Man]

Be real....looks less much foolish

 

[Mercury]

It's amazing that in all this conversation, liberty and free choice is never mentioned. It's like all three of you know better what people should do than the people themselves.

What about freedom?

It has it's limits.
Society makes those decisions by enacting laws.

...... This is one of the strange things about the United States ....

One of the things that is mentioned time and time again is that this Country was built on individual liberty ...

... yet then we can't allow chaos by having a "free-for-all" ... the majority want at least some restrictions ...

... yet majority vote doesn't make law always ....

Such a strange phenomenon ... yet it has done very well!

 

[The Man]

Be real....looks less much foolish

Or I should say much less...Not being able to edit sucks

 

[Accountable]

Come on people...Why not just argue.."Why cant I smoke pot anytime I want..who is the Govt to say I cant"
Rather than attempting to propose that the children will be better off etc

Exactly!!

 

[Accountable]

It has it's limits.
Society makes those decisions by enacting laws.

Your argument allows the freedom to yell 'Fire!' in a crowded theater when there is no fire.
Society currently rejects your position, as an absolute, for it's own protection.

That's got nothing to do with freedom, but with property rights. I'd be glad to discuss it in another thread because it's really pretty interesting.

Same with drug abuse.

And I should point out that your libertarian position is also an argument for chaos bordering on anarchy where unrestricted freedoms can become mechanisms to rationalize antisocial behavior.

Wouldn't that be anarchy bordering on chaos? Meh, it's your hyperbole I guess you can exaggerate however you want.
Why would you want to outlaw antisocial behavior? We're not even free to like being alone, in your world?

 

[Greatest I am]

The sale of alcohol to adults is controlled by the state.

Yes. So would the sale of any other drug. As it should be.

And yet it's still abused by children.

So I'm calling BS on your post.
A quick search brought this up:
http://www.adolescent-substance-abuse.com/binge-drinking-underage.html
excerpt>

Yes. Many children are into drugs of all kinds thanks to the black market kept in business by prohibition.

Under present uncontrolled systems, people are not aware when children steal their various drugs.
In a controlled or monitored system through the medical establishment, this would be reduced thus allowing children to grow their brains longer before getting into drugs. The older they are before experimenting, the better it is for the addiction rates.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Not even going to read it GIA.

Lets try this the easy way...how is the legalization of a controlled substance and taxing the dealers going to reduce drug usage by children.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDt8NXLs1ws&feature=player_embedded

Under a controlled system it would still be illegal to sell to children and if legal otherwise, we gain the moral justification to allow us to come down hard on anyone who would target children.

The pusher system we now have would likely disappear as it would become inefficient and unprofitable.

Remember if it is legal the price will go down...thus more children can afford it

Not likely.

If it becomes legal it becomes more abundant ...thus more available for the children..in addition to the lower price.
If it becomes legal..more children will see less wrong with using it...and thus more will use it

If you had bothered reading any government or addiction research paper you would not hold this view.

Nowhere has drug use increased with decriminalization or legalization.
If anyone wants drugs, there is presently no restrictions so those who will use are already doing so.

Please break how your proposition will aid in the reduction of drug usage by children.

By controlling access to a higher degree and a little thing that education will provide our children with. The ability to use intelligent use of freedom of choice when they come of age.

Further, the glamor of doing something naughty will be gone and lack of that enticement alone will help reduce demand.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

all those arguments applied to booze. eventually it became obvious that making it illegal did more harm than legalizing. Drug dealers would be put out of business for the most part. Same as moonshiners were... for the most part.

Keeping it criminal is criminal and ignores history.

I agree.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

It has it's limits.
Society makes those decisions by enacting laws.

Your argument allows the freedom to yell 'Fire!' in a crowded theater when there is no fire.
Society currently rejects your position, as an absolute, for it's own protection.

Same with drug abuse.

And I should point out that your libertarian position is also an argument for chaos bordering on anarchy where unrestricted freedoms can become mechanisms to rationalize antisocial behavior.

You seem to class all drug use as drug abuse.

Is drug use always drug abuse in your mind?

Is it drug abuse to have a drink or toast the bride more than once?
Is it drug abuse if a pot smoker has a puff after work?

You forget that the vast majority of all drugs are users with normal lives and that only the unfortunate fall into abuse.

Regards
DL