Despite that arguing with you is appearing to be an exercise in futility; I must be a bit of a masochist. I will now quote your posts and then exactly what I said above here to make things a little more clear for you as you seem to have forgotten what you have said.
how would this be any different from it is now, considering that many people who start using drugs are in high school. they would still be obtaining it illegally and thus the market for illegal drugs would still exist.
. First, the legalization of marijuana doesn't actually mean it would be more readily available for children/teens. A study was done by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy that showed that for all age category of students polled, marijuana was much more easily accessible than was alcohol. That should make it blatantly clear that age restrictions and legal measures are more effective than allowing the black market to dictate trade to minors.
That single quote of yours was what my entire response was in reference to. Just because I have a few extra minutes of time, I'll dispute a few of the other falsehoods that you proclaim.
Because a lot of drugs are much much more harmful than alcohol and cigs will ever be. Its already bad enough that people are getting addicted to Cigs and alcohol so honestly we do not need something worse readily available on the market.
Annual causes of death in the United States:
Poor Diet and Physical Inactivity 365,000
Alcohol induced 23,199
Microbial Agents 75,000
Motor Vehicle Crashes 42,031
Adverse Reactions to Prescription Drugs 32,000
Incidents Involving Firearms 29,000
Drugs Including Prescription and OTC 21,000
Sexual Behaviors 20,000
All Illicit Drug Use, Direct and Indirect 17,000
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) 11,295
Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs Such As Aspirin 7,600
It certainly doesn't appear that drugs (in particular marijuana) are worse for you than Tobacco or Alcohol as you stated above.
Moving right along, by your own admission you stated:
the above poster said that it would only be sold to people of a certain age.
so the market for those group of people would still exist.
besides a lot of people grow weed themselves and sell it to other people, its still gona go around easily.
So you are on record saying that drugs are still going to be around regardless of them being illegal or not. Logically, the only reason they would still be around is because people are choosing to use them and hence the demand. So from your own version of reality, the thing that changes circumstantially to the legalization of marijuana isn't the demand or the use, but instead you'd prefer to see people who you claim are addicted,(Skip to next paragraph to finish this sentence)(See your claim here:
because drugs cause addiction, i know some people who smoke weed, and they do it all the time, whether or not they have work to do they will find an excuse to smoke. And the argument about how weed doesnt cause true addiction is ridiculous. If people have something that will make them feel good and only that thing can produce the effect, then they will obviously want more of it, hence addiction. It doesnt have to be a biological chemically induced addiction but an addiction is an addiction, just like how one can be addicted to a video game.
[Side note to comment on this line in particular: " And the argument about how weed doesnt cause true addiction is ridiculous. If people have something that will make them feel good and only that thing can produce the effect, then they will obviously want more of it, hence addiction. It doesnt have to be a biological chemically induced addiction but an addiction is an addiction, just like how one can be addicted to a video game."
What do you think an addiction to a video game is then if it is not a biochemical dependency? Addiction by it's very nature is derived from the need
of the person be it psychologically or physically. Both forms of addiction are caused through a biochemical link to the act at hand and the feeling of pleasure.]
go to jail for their addiction than for it to be treated as a medical issue over a criminal one. (sorry that point got a bit abstract and distracted from having to correct all of your other factual inaccuracies.)
and finally, the last thing I have time to correct you on.
and finally what does drug overdose have anything to do with legalizing drugs, if anything you would have more deaths from drug overdose simply from the fact that there will be an increase number of people using drugs. Legalized drugs does not mean drug education nor does it mean more self control
False. Let's take heroin as a prime example. (As most illicit drug overdoses are attributed to heroin, I think it is a fair drug to bring forth to the table.) The reason for heroin overdoses isn't caused from some lack of self control as you seem to imply. The problem exists due to varying potency of heroin from one dealer to the next; one batch to the next. They do the same one bag shot they always do but this time the purity is 21% instead of 12% and they overdose
. Through legalization, heroin would be a regulated product sold at a pharmaceutical grade purity. Much like any other medication, it could come in prepackaged doses and come included with plenty of information about proper dosing. Also to your last point, I think the whole premise of legalizing drugs comes implicit with further drug education and treatment facilities instead of prisons and criminals.
There you are. I posted a long post including tons of quotations and in the post before that I cited a study done by a government body on the matter. All you've contributed to this thread is a series of useless, factless opinions that may amount in totality to half the size of this single post.
Second post that was added after the one above to respond to Lee. --------
Not an assumption, that's based on fact. If something is legalised (notice the s) and given the green light from the government then the usage will increase. No-one plans to use heroin, do you think teenagers start on heroin?
I lol'ed at your pointing out the British spelling to me.
No, I don't think most people plan on starting out on heroin... (Though I'm sure it does happen. Before I ever had a cigarette, a drop of alcohol, or any marijuana, I was doing cocaine; my first drug that I actively sought to find.) but I also don't think that people just accidentally end up doing heroin either. I think this theory of gateway drugs that you are pulling from is inherently flawed. (The, "ask any drug addict what the first drug they ever did was and they will all tell you it was marijuana" thing) The same could be applied to alcohol, tobacco, or paracetamol (look at me throwing in British shit for you.
p.s. frostz, err.. I mean, a certain somebody
, see my long post above.