12 replies to this topic

[Gone]

Is it just the rebelious side of people or mostly curiousity? Of course there is the good old case of alchol bans that lead to people gaining their own means of liquor. Don't forget Opium, Britain beat the crap out of China (and its ban) and opened the flood gates.. Drugs are illegal in many countries yet the rate of abusers hasn't rally decreased.

There are some that argue that prohibitions causes mostly harm. There are countries that allow different substances and activities that are illegal somewhere else, but isn't as widespread. Myabe the fad dies quickly. I'm not sure if having a ban or losing one is more benficial.

Edited by Frowlsar, 14 July 2008 - 08:59 AM.

[Tetiel]

It's not always true. It just merely increases crime. Unfortunately this is especially true for substances which are addictive. The Prohibition in the 1920s in America was actually a bad idea because the lawmakers did not understand the addictive properties of alcohol. For example, if the government put up a ban on cigarettes people would go to the black market as well just simply as they cannot easily give it up. The problem with this is that it gives money into the wrong hands. Instead of getting taxes from those cigarettes like england and america does, that money would go into the hands of organized crime. Honestly it's because of the alcohol ban in the first place which got the mob to be so incredibly strong in the earlier 20th century.

Now I'm not saying we should unban certain drugs, but this could be used as an argument for it. But honestly even in Amsterdam it's illegal to purchase and own most drugs so...

[Breadfan]

It's the Ban and the Unban Specifically that are the issue IMO.

Once someone says "hey don't look at this picture"

Spoiler! --Click here to view--

They will most likely be more inclined to do so if given the chance.

Also, once a ban lifts, people (not particularly smart I suppose" think of it as "hey we can do X now hurray let's all do it so much we catch up on time lost"


Nothing should be banned if there's ever going to be an educated question that it should be unbanned.

[digital_zero]

You gotta think about it though: What else CAN be done, prohibition aside?

A jail term might be too lenient for certain cases. Look at the 10 or so countries in the world which have already implemented capital punishment as one of the consequences for drug trafficking. The activity there is especially low, and for a couple, practically non-existent or completely underground.

It may sound harsh, but its one of the ways to get results.

[redlion]

You gotta think about it though: What else CAN be done, prohibition aside?

A jail term might be too lenient for certain cases. Look at the 10 or so countries in the world which have already implemented capital punishment as one of the consequences for drug trafficking. The activity there is especially low, and for a couple, practically non-existent or completely underground.

It may sound harsh, but its one of the ways to get results.

It depends. Singapore is one of the most crime-free societies on the planet, but they also have no personal freedom, can't chew gum, and can be killed for having a doobie. Would never work in the States.

There have to be tiers to any democratic punishment system. Serious drug traffickers I wouldn't mind seeing getting capital punishment. However, the appeals process in the States will tear that up. It obviously isn't fair for people that have one kilo of coke to get the death penalty, but people with 9/10ths of a key cannot. And high school kids that are smoking pot can't go to jail with hardened criminals. That isn't rehabilitation, thats criminal breeding. Too many gray areas in drugs for capital punishment.

An alternative is the tack that Argentina is taking. They're proposing laws decriminalizing use and possession of small amounts of marijuana. "[We]...conclude that the (highly unlikely) risk of addiction is an acceptable ‘cost’ for the benefits gained."

They're hoping to isolate the hard drug users and traffickers from the rather large marijuana user base.

[Amagius]

When something is prohibited, yet people still want it, it goes to a black market. Due to the fairly static demand for it and the now illegal nature of trafficking what is prohibited, it increases the price. With higher prices, it becomes lucrative to steal and kill for this. If the prohibited material is addictive, it only further increases the price and the crime related to it.

The effect of rebellion is limited compared to these economic factors.

[digital_zero]

It depends. Singapore is one of the most crime-free societies on the planet, but they also have no personal freedom, can't chew gum, and can be killed for having a doobie. Would never work in the States.

There have to be tiers to any democratic punishment system. Serious drug traffickers I wouldn't mind seeing getting capital punishment. However, the appeals process in the States will tear that up. It obviously isn't fair for people that have one kilo of coke to get the death penalty, but people with 9/10ths of a key cannot. And high school kids that are smoking pot can't go to jail with hardened criminals. That isn't rehabilitation, thats criminal breeding. Too many gray areas in drugs for capital punishment.

An alternative is the tack that Argentina is taking. They're proposing laws decriminalizing use and possession of small amounts of marijuana. "[We]...conclude that the (highly unlikely) risk of addiction is an acceptable ‘cost’ for the benefits gained."

They're hoping to isolate the hard drug users and traffickers from the rather large marijuana user base.

I grew up in a society with such implementations. Apologies for my rather one-sided opinion. I don't expect for such harsh punishments to be put into practice everywhere else. Maybe something similar, on a lighter level would suffice. It'll at least serve as a deterrent for the more major drug traffickers, at the very least.

Proper rehabiliation of addicts is difficult for many countries, as it is a non-profitable system governments would think twice before implementing. Yea, throwing them in prison along with other offenders should be avoided. Insolation isn't the solution to the problem, either.

Maybe if they could someway profit from having such a system?

[Melchoire]

I think certain softer drugs should be legalized, like weed, lsd, certain hallucinogens, and maybe even blow. The tax money the govt. would get from this could be used to educate youth about the realities of drugs, and even supply free rehab programs.

Also when you make it easy to get guns(like putting it in the fucking constitution) and put in harsh drug laws(like making it all illegal) you naturally end up with high death rates. =/ I've been saying this for a long time.

[AxE ™]

I think certain softer drugs should be legalized, like weed

Right on track..

[redlion]

Right on track..

The federal police agencies have already said they aren't pursuing any prosecution for individual users of marijuana. Its only a matter of time.

[Fatal]

I believe prohibition causes only harm, it causes stealing in order to pay for the drugs, and the drugs cant be regulated so other dangerous substances can be added on.

[digital_zero]

I think certain softer drugs should be legalized, like weed, lsd, certain hallucinogens, and maybe even blow. The tax money the govt. would get from this could be used to educate youth about the realities of drugs, and even supply free rehab programs.

Also when you make it easy to get guns(like putting it in the fucking constitution) and put in harsh drug laws(like making it all illegal) you naturally end up with high death rates. =/ I've been saying this for a long time.

Extreme prohibition comes with a huge price to pay. But at least it produces immediate results.

[Amagius]

Extreme prohibition comes with a huge price to pay. But at least it produces immediate results.

As results can be negative, I can't help but agree. The results are immediate.