Steel “The war on drugs is a sham and we are all paying”

Prove that it is a sham.

You make grand claims

Now stand behind them and prove them.

As for your statement “That's like me saying that hospitals today are a health hazard because of the conditions and lack of sanitation a century or more ago.”

You might think your drug of choice, being made by some hairy biker mixing matchstick heads with farm chemicals and cooking the lot in drain cleaner, then shipping the ‘product’ in the crank case of his Harley Davison is “sanitary”, but I suspect it is even worse than drinking the outflow of a sewer.

Or your cocaine and heroin being cut with baking soda or cleaning chemicals is sanitary and healthy.

Fractelle “The one thing we can’t do as a society is legislate against stupidity.

We can set up programs to minimise harm,”

Agree, That is why illegal drugs are illegal,

Making them illegal is the program which minimizes harm,

Agree, you will still get stupid people but the numbers exercising “stupidity” will be fewer if these substances are prohibited, rather than legally sanctioned.

Same was speeding fines and drink drive limits do not stop everyone but they do stop a lot.

“If drugs addicts are required to register with rehabilitation and health programs it is possible to actively monitor and communicate with the majority of drug users.”

Assumes drug addicts want to rehabilitate.

Harder to do when a drug is legal

Drug addicts got where they were by disregarding societal norms and expectations.

I doubt they would register simply because you want them to.

If we, legalised drugs resulting in far more drug addicts reliant on tax paid public order, social welfare and public medical services that we all contribute to

At what point

Do they overwhelm those services?

What happens to service queues for the genuine non-addicts whose taxes pay for those services?

When do we say, junkie “volenti non fit injuria,”

Fix it yourself or die alone

Col Rouge "As for your statement “That's like me saying that hospitals..."

I think you misunderstand that statement as it's actually the reverse. You want people to be forced to consume drugs that are illegal and have dangerous mixes that end up killing them.

Steel “I think you misunderstand that statement as it's actually the reverse. You want people to be forced to consume drugs that are illegal and have dangerous mixes that end up killing them.”

HA HA HA

What twisted, perverted logic, Steel.

So you think because I think something should be illegal, I am ‘forcing’ (= your word) people to consume illegal drugs which are more ‘harmful’ to them.

I am not forcing them to do anything,

I am trying to minimise the ‘harm’ which they are attracted to, by making it illegal.

You think that by making illegal drugs ‘legal’ you are going to do away will the harmfulness?

Do you think a ‘legally induced psychotic episode’ is less harmful than an illegal one?

You think that just because you supply something legally, you automatically stop the illegal?

Well if that were true -

we would not have chop-chop illegal tobacco
we would not have illegal gambling
we would not have people who operate unlicenced, illegal drink clubs
we would not have illegal prostitution

Making something 'legal', does not automatically stop an illegal trade

The real problem is

What is a tiny minority of drug addicts, sucking off the welfare system today

Will become an epidemic of dysfunctional junkies crippling the welfare system and still stealing to get the illegal drugs which will be cheaper (and as polluted as they are now) than the legal supplies (‘chop chop’ tobacco being the classic example).

I suggest your twisted logic is a symptom of using too much of your own illegal drug of choice, it is certainly impairing your reasoning.
I only hope you do not drive a car or operate heavy machinery.

If drug users only harmed themselves I would not give a rats.

They do not harm only themselves,
they harm their families,
the people they steal from,
the innocent bystanders who get attacked by psychotics,
the people waiting in medical queues because the medical services are overloaded dealing with junkies.
Other road users involved in accidents because some pot-smoking tool cannot respond properly to the movement of his vehicle.

Col

Steel's point: "You want people to be forced to consume drugs that are illegal and have dangerous mixes that end up killing them."

The words 'harm minimisation' aren't in your vocabulary are they?

You have failed to convince that you even have a rudimentary understanding of drug prohibition. You are still repeating yourself over and over:

"Drugs are illegal, users must be terminated... (sorry I mean) punished"

I can't get this image of Davros out of my head.

I will try.

Col.

Hypothetical

If alcohol was prohibited (as it was in the USA in the 1930's) would you?

a. Abstain from that glass of cabernet.

b. Be first in line at the local speakeasy.

Col Rouge you are like stevenimeyer who will say there will be an epidemic of muslims across europe and the world, taking over. If you utilise simple mathematics, rather than emotions, you would see that this is far from the truth, or rather it would take hundreds of years.

You think we all will suddenly start taking drugs, as if tomorrow we will start smoking or becoming alcoholics. It's absolute nonsense. Sane rational people will not do this. Users who are currently criminalised and forced into a life of crime, will be able to do this in safety without stealing from people.

I never claimed the illegal trade would stop. But listen to yourself for a minute. If alcohol were made illegal, you would be talking about executing all these drug users and saying the same things about them. You have no rational reason, to support your position other than to cry about these evil people, most of whom would otherwise be law-abiding citizens. Do you demonise the wealthy who regularly take drugs, but manage to get along fine? Admittedly some don't but that can be attributed to the illegality of the drugs in the first place.

Col

You might realise that your error is in believing that invalid statements like

"Gambling is not physically addictive.

Cocaine, heroin and Amphetamines, in their various forms are."

define human behaviour, when in fact they are only invalid observations of human behaviour. The latter observation might raise the question, "Does this apply to all human beings?". Clearly, it does not. Hence Robert's comparison of drug taking with activities like scuba diving.

"Gambling does not cause physical medical issues
Gambling does not cause psychosis"

Quite wrong, Col. e.g.

http://www.wesleymission.org.au/publications/r&d/suicide.htm#problem

"Problem gambling, with its potentially devastating impacts on the finances, personal lives and relationships of the affected gamblers, is related to heightened anxiety, depression, and in extreme cases, to suicide."

I could go on but I see no point in explaining to a moron why their ideas are moronic. I mean, what you really need is an IQ boost. And I wouldn't have made any comment on your stupid musings but for the fact that seeing a moron vilifying human beings and inanimate objects just grates me.