while I agree with your sentiments about drug use/abuse and it's detrimental effects on society, I have to argue with your semantics on this particular quote. The escape of Slaves from southern USA, pre-emancipation, was detrimental to society as it stood at that time and you don't here anyone arguing here that said emancipation and previous escapes should be considered criminal. Labor camps, Sweatshops, etc. could be considered beneficial to a society as they bring in a large amount of labor to build capital, as well as providing jobs to those who may not have them otherwise(in terms of sweatshops). Nobody would argue their criminalization.
Drug abuse and it's illegalization should be considered soley for the benefit of the harmful properties to those affected by the drug use, including consideration for the vicitms of crimes commited by those under the influence of said drugs. Societies are adaptable to most any given circumstances and will fundamentally react and adjust to problems caused by drug abuse, however the individual who suffer should be given protection.
I have to argue with your semantics on this particular quote.
Semantics is about the meaning of words.
The escape of Slaves from southern USA, pre-emancipation, was detrimental to society,,,,,,
Your argument is about context and it has one hell of a fallacy associated with it.
What was detrimental to society with your scenario was the legalization of slavery, emancipation was a correction of that injustice.
Labor camps, Sweatshops, etc. could be considered beneficial to a society as they bring in a large amount of labor to build capital
Let me guess....you're a closet Republican :24:
Of course they aren't beneficial to a society.
The fallacy......the labor is already there to be had. It's abuse by immoral businessmen leveraging the labor market for personal gain. Pay workers the value of their input and you generate consumers, pay sweatshop wages and you enrich the individuals controlling the process.
This is exactly what early labor unions faced. The struggle of a class to survive with dignity.
Nobody would argue their criminalization.
WTF?
Have you ever heard of minimum wage legislation?
Let me help you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_law#United_States
Drug abuse and it's illegalization should be considered soley for the benefit of the harmful properties to those affected by the drug use,...................
The problem with that logic is that bystanders are also affected by the actions and rationale of those abusing drugs. From transportation to the work place, from the actions of professionals in their line of work to the interactions of everyday people, a society contending with intense distractions tends to make decisions flawed by those distractions......they are called 'poor choices' and along with those 'poor choices' is a decline in social values.
A list to consider:
http://www.gurusoftware.com/GuruNet/Social/Topics/Values.htm
ahem.....remembering your argument supporting sweatshops......there are probably a lot of social values being bent to allow defacto slavery. ( and I'm not accusing you of imbibing....just pointing out how a society's values are affected, altered and then accepted.)
It's done by accepting......what's the harm in just a little bit more, over and over and over until the result is an obvious negative. That's the path to the failure of a society.
It's the selfishness of the individual arguing for self benefit at the expense of the health and security of a society.
We've recently experienced this with the banking failures where men controlling the financial industry of the US made decisions at the expense of our society and almost brought it down.
Were they necessarily drug abusers, no.....but not only were their actions of illicit intent, politicians
legislated that lack of oversight and the public went along on what they perceived as get rich opportunities.
Poor decisions in a society, en mass.
Or how about the poor decision to invade Iraq that supposedly 70% of the public supported?
They weren't all fundamentalists on a crusade against Islam :cool
Societies are adaptable to most any given circumstances and will fundamentally react and adjust to problems caused by drug abuse,...............
That's usually legislation to control the abuse.
Prohibition failed. Alcohol abuse continues and our society has failed in it's duty to contain the damages from it.
Briefly:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_abuse#Societal_and_economic_costs
In depth:
( this is a downloadable PDF file )
http://www.cadca.org/files/resources/RIA-Jan-Feb-2012.pdf
excerpt>
In 2006 , the estimated total economic cost of excessive alcohol consumption in the United States amounted to $223.5 billion or $1.90 per drink, which equals about $746 for each man, woman, and child on a per capita basis. Of the $223.5 billion, $161.3 billion (72.3%) represent costs from lost productivity. Of this $161.3 billion, the two greatest losses came from impaired productivity at work (45.9%) and lost productivity due to the 83,180 alcohol-related deaths (40.3%).
Within the $24.6 billion (11.0%) estimate due to increased healthcare costs, the largest expenditures came from specialty treatment for alcohol abuse and dependence (43.4%) and hospitalizations from excessive drinking medical conditions (20.8%). The biggest cost from other effects comes from criminal justice system costs, totaling $21 billion, due to crimes that are not considered mainly alcohol-attributable, such as assault versus drinking and driving. The cost of motor vehicle crashes also accounted for a significant percentage of the total cost related to other effects ($14 billion in total).
Of the total economic costs of excessive drinking, binge drinking amounts to $170.7 billion (76.4%), underage drinking equals $27.0 billion (12.1%), drinking while pregnant represents $5.2 billion, or 2.3% (mostly related to FAS), and the costs of crime come to $73.3 billion (9.2%). The federal, state, and local government bear these economic costs ($94.2 billion) along with excessive drinkers and their families ($92.9 billion), with the government bearing most of the costs for healthcare expenditures and excessive drinkers and their families covering productivity losses.
That's just the effects of alcohol. As The Man pointed out, there is no logical reason for that abuse to stop just because pot is added to the list of approved drugs to abuse.
Now consider that legalization of pot, or hard drugs in general, is only going to increase those losses along with an increase in social stress and further decline in a values system.
