Should we decriminalize drugs and let big pharma take over production?

[theclemsonkid]

With the death of Phillip Seymour Hoffman (herein called PSH), the debate of drug policy in the United States has once again taken a front seat on the public psyche. While someone as wealthy as PSH would really have not been affected to great lengths by altered policy, tens of millions of others certainly would be. The current system is set up to take both offenders, as well as dealers, and criminalize their activities, and in most cases, send them to prison for a short period of time. Upon re-entering society, it's estimated that upwards of 68% of those criminals will be sent back to prison at some point in their lives for re-offending a drug based charge.

With the number of drug related crimes rising, more people dying from overdoses, the federal and state prisons being flooded with new and past offenders, and now 1 out of every 3 people in federal and state prisons are in on a drug related charge; you have to agree that the current system is flawed at best, broken at worst.

I honestly don't know how I feel about decriminalizing all drugs, for a number of reasons. Here is how I would do it in a perfect world... so please critique, discuss, and improve upon/tear apart my vision
1. Immediately decriminalize marijuana. Allow big pharma to produce pot. This basically eliminates the flow of marijuana from the south, and the crimes and death that come with the drug trade. Tax it similarly to cigarettes, but don't get to the point where the price would force average consumers to look to the black/former market. Also, come up with legislation that protects workers from losing their job because of it (under normal circumstances, not people like pilots, police, doctors, etc).

2. Work on a system to have pharmaceutical companies produce other drugs (i.e. cocaine, heroin, meth, etc) in a clean, and consistent environment. The biggest problem with drug abuse, is assuming that there is some way to completely eliminate it. You will NEVER, under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, eliminate drug use. So, as a society (and government) you have a choice to make. You can either A) continue prosecuting, hoping that you will at some point eliminate the drugs, and deal with the spillover from the drug trade, or B) realize that drugs will always be taken, and figure out a way to minimize the damage.

If you can produce these drugs in a clean environment, you will eliminate almost all overdoses. The vast majority of overdoses come from people who get a hold of one thing, when they think they have something else. For example, you get some heroin, which you assume is "normal", only to find out in the autopsy and toxicolgy report that it was laced with bleach or some other nasty thing. While some people will certainly OD regardless, you could cut down those numbers quite a bit.

How these drugs would be distributed would be the issue. You can't really "sell" hard drugs at CVS. So, set up clinics where you not only have these drugs, but you also have access to methadone, rehab, and any other kind of service that would be able to help someone break the habit. The people would have to have "limited" access, and pushing to help them should be the goal.

3. Get that socialist Obama out of office so we can get back some jobs. That way people will actually be at work and won't have time to be doing drugs! (*Ok, that last one was sarcasm, but with this group I felt it appropriate)

Thoughts?!?

 

[phixer]

Allright kid, you asked. Heres the fix although many may disagree it is guaranteed to work. A .20 cent bullet is much cheaper than 20 yrs of incarceration. Please read.

You make all drugs legal, all of them, everything someone can make becomes legal. And you take the safety labels off everything else. This forces people to think for themselves and just like exercise they become stronger when more weight is added.

You see morons and retards have a natural propensity to destroy themselves (by drinking gasoline, walking into trains, gulping pop rocks, being chased by camels and kicked to death, setting themselves on fire , skiing into stationary objects , eaten by killer whales at Sea World or... overdosing) we just have a hard time accepting this fact, especially if the moron gene happens to run in our family. If left alone they will go away.

Strong people dont do shite like this and therefore remain alive to pass on the stronger genes which inevitably results in a stronger species and guys like Chuck Norris. You see, there exists a factory which mass produce's morons and retards by creating laws that allow them to thrive and reproduce virally just like Dodo birds.

This factory has built the perfect environment for them and due to their lower IQ and resistance to "Jedi mind deception" they continually supply the factory. The factory uses the Dodo bird similar to the way humans were used within the Matrix, the energy the "factory" needs is supplied in the form of...(votes and taxes) ... so they both need each other.

So the Dodo's start breeding like crazy polluting the environment, consuming resources (Ever been to Africa, India or Mexico? ) and making the factory bigger without realizing it.

As in nature the weak will inevitability perish due to their own stupidity and the species or herd will become stronger if simply left alone. And that's a good thing ... unless your a Dodo bird.

Ponder this next time your waiting in traffic.

 

[aggiealum]

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheClemsonKid http:///t/397132/should-we-decriminalize-drugs-and-let-big-pharma-take-over-production#post_3538678
With the death of Phillip Seymour Hoffman (herein called PSH), the debate of drug policy in the United States has once again taken a front seat on the public psyche. While someone as wealthy as PSH would really have not been affected to great lengths by altered policy, tens of millions of others certainly would be. The current system is set up to take both offenders, as well as dealers, and criminalize their activities, and in most cases, send them to prison for a short period of time. Upon re-entering society, it's estimated that upwards of 68% of those criminals will be sent back to prison at some point in their lives for re-offending a drug based charge.

With the number of drug related crimes rising, more people dying from overdoses, the federal and state prisons being flooded with new and past offenders, and now 1 out of every 3 people in federal and state prisons are in on a drug related charge; you have to agree that the current system is flawed at best, broken at worst.

I honestly don't know how I feel about decriminalizing all drugs, for a number of reasons. Here is how I would do it in a perfect world... so please critique, discuss, and improve upon/tear apart my vision
1. Immediately decriminalize marijuana. Allow big pharma to produce pot. This basically eliminates the flow of marijuana from the south, and the crimes and death that come with the drug trade. Tax it similarly to cigarettes, but don't get to the point where the price would force average consumers to look to the black/former market. Also, come up with legislation that protects workers from losing their job because of it (under normal circumstances, not people like pilots, police, doctors, etc).

2. Work on a system to have pharmaceutical companies produce other drugs (i.e. cocaine, heroin, meth, etc) in a clean, and consistent environment. The biggest problem with drug abuse, is assuming that there is some way to completely eliminate it. You will NEVER, under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, eliminate drug use. So, as a society (and government) you have a choice to make. You can either A) continue prosecuting, hoping that you will at some point eliminate the drugs, and deal with the spillover from the drug trade, or B) realize that drugs will always be taken, and figure out a way to minimize the damage.

If you can produce these drugs in a clean environment, you will eliminate almost all overdoses. The vast majority of overdoses come from people who get a hold of one thing, when they think they have something else. For example, you get some heroin, which you assume is "normal", only to find out in the autopsy and toxicolgy report that it was laced with bleach or some other nasty thing. While some people will certainly OD regardless, you could cut down those numbers quite a bit.

How these drugs would be distributed would be the issue. You can't really "sell" hard drugs at CVS. So, set up clinics where you not only have these drugs, but you also have access to methadone, rehab, and any other kind of service that would be able to help someone break the habit. The people would have to have "limited" access, and pushing to help them should be the goal.

3. Get that socialist Obama out of office so we can get back some jobs. That way people will actually be at work and won't have time to be doing drugs! (*Ok, that last one was sarcasm, but with this group I felt it appropriate)

Thoughts?!?
Call me Heisenberg. My meth is 99% pure.

 

[2quills]

Sounds like you guys are just looking for excuses to smoke some reefer. Might be time to start drug testing members around here.
Sorry Clemson. Ohio hasn't joined that band wagon yet.

 

[beth]

I think its a good idea to start with decriminalizing marijuana. And no, I don't use it. Its no more harmful then alcohol perhaps even less so.

 

[darthtang aw]

What happens to a child who grows up in a house with parents that regularly smoke pot? Enclosed space with child brains developing surrounded by pot smoke. This can't happen with alcohol. We bastardize cigarette smoke but turn around and champion a drug that has equally (if not more) harmful effects. the myth that Marijuana is natural is a crock. Just because it is natural does not mean the smoke isn't harmful in an equal amount of ways.
As an adult sure it doesn't have nearly the affect on the brain/intelligence of people. But as children studies have shown a drop in IQ by as much as 15 points. Most permanently.
So here is the question....will legal marijuana benefit society as a whole?
Sure we reduce our prison size, but is that worth the cost of our children's future intelligence?
The Stoners in school when we were growing, did they graduate top of their class? Did they graduate at all?
Compare Pot to alcohol is not apples to apples. One shot of alcohol is equivalent to one puff of pot. Ever known anyone to do just one hit a day?

 

[theclemsonkid]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397132/should-we-decriminalize-drugs-and-let-big-pharma-take-over-production#post_3538764
What happens to a child who grows up in a house with parents that regularly smoke pot? Enclosed space with child brains developing surrounded by pot smoke. This can't happen with alcohol. We bastardize cigarette smoke but turn around and champion a drug that has equally (if not more) harmful effects. the myth that Marijuana is natural is a crock. Just because it is natural does not mean the smoke isn't harmful in an equal amount of ways.
As an adult sure it doesn't have nearly the affect on the brain/intelligence of people. But as children studies have shown a drop in IQ by as much as 15 points. Most permanently.
So here is the question....will legal marijuana benefit society as a whole?
Sure we reduce our prison size, but is that worth the cost of our children's future intelligence?
The Stoners in school when we were growing, did they graduate top of their class? Did they graduate at all?
Compare Pot to alcohol is not apples to apples. One shot of alcohol is equivalent to one puff of pot. Ever known anyone to do just one hit a day?

I think any parents who are at the top of the gene pool would know better than to smoke up with their young children present. The ones who wouldn't care, are the same ones who are already teetering the line between "normal" and "developmentally disabled" anyways. And the majority of those people choose to procreate with others of the same ilk. And not only do they procreate, but they do so at alarming numbers. While those who have a college degree or higher are having children at an all-time low rate.

So while I can see pot negatively effecting those kids, let's be honest, genetically speaking, they are already at a huge disadvantage. And assuming these are the people who do drugs in general, wouldn't you rather they smoke pot that would be easy and affordable to get, as opposed to cocaine, heroin, meth, etc?

 

[darthtang aw]

I think any parents who are at the top of the gene pool would know better than to smoke up with their young children present.  The ones who wouldn't care, are the same ones who are already teetering the line between "normal" and "developmentally disabled" anyways.  And the majority of those people choose to procreate with others of the same ilk.  And not only do they procreate, but they do so at alarming numbers.  While those who have a college degree or higher are having children at an all-time low rate. 
So while I can see pot negatively effecting those kids, let's be honest, genetically speaking, they are already at a huge disadvantage.  And assuming these are the people who do drugs in general, wouldn't you rather they smoke pot that would be easy and affordable to get, as opposed to cocaine, heroin, meth, etc?
You have obviously never suffered from drug addiction. The need to get high outweighs the common sense of the individual in the top tier gene pool. If the gene pool would save us from this problem how come so many intelligent individuals still drink and drive?
Your question concerning what I would prefer, a little "harmless" pot or heroin usage is a non question in reality. If I told you child porn can keep pedophiles from molesting children, would you say child pornography should be legalized, as long as the children be photographed consent with their parents permission?

 

[phixer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397132/should-we-decriminalize-drugs-and-let-big-pharma-take-over-production#post_3538764
What happens to a child who grows up in a house with parents that regularly smoke pot? Enclosed space with child brains developing surrounded by pot smoke. This can't happen with alcohol. We bastardize cigarette smoke but turn around and champion a drug that has equally (if not more) harmful effects. the myth that Marijuana is natural is a crock. Just because it is natural does not mean the smoke isn't harmful in an equal amount of ways.
As an adult sure it doesn't have nearly the affect on the brain/intelligence of people. But as children studies have shown a drop in IQ by as much as 15 points. Most permanently.
So here is the question....will legal marijuana benefit society as a whole?
Sure we reduce our prison size, but is that worth the cost of our children's future intelligence?
The Stoners in school when we were growing, did they graduate top of their class? Did they graduate at all?
Compare Pot to alcohol is not apples to apples. One shot of alcohol is equivalent to one puff of pot. Ever known anyone to do just one hit a day?
The same thing that happens when a kid grows up in a house of cigarette smokers (which is legal, nicotine vs THC). The argument to make smoke illegal will not make people more responsible and should follow the same guidelines as child abuse. If the kid is under the age of 18 and found to have THC in their system or asthma related to second hand smoking it is the fault of the parents plain and simple.

Use existing laws to prosecute the parents for child endangerment and or contributing to a minor. But dont punish the 70 yo guy suffering from MS who may toke up to relieve his pain.

You cant fix stupid by imposing laws, stupid can only be fixed by removing laws and emulating nature.

As a whole no, nothing benefits society as a whole because only the smart ones figure out the correct use of things. The dumb ones eventually fail to evolve.

Yes, because the world needs ditch diggers also. Cant dig ditches in prison. Those who can--- lead, those who cant--- follow.

No, they formed Led Zepplin and 3 decades later monopolized the legal Marijuanna industry.

It's the responsibility of the parents and if someone happens to have irresponsible parents who would smoke dope in front of their kids thats really stupid. And as sad as it may be thats their problem and not the role of govt to fix it.

 

[darthtang aw]

The same thing that happens when a kid grows up in a house of cigarette smokers (which is legal,  nicotine vs THC).  The argument to make smoke illegal will not make people more responsible and should follow the same guidelines as child abuse.  If the kid is under the age of 18 and found to have THC in their system or asthma related to second hand smoking it is the fault of the parents plain and simple.
Use existing laws to prosecute the parents for child endangerment and or contributing to a minor.  But dont punish the 70 yo guy suffering from MS who may toke up to relieve his pain.
You cant fix stupid by imposing laws,  stupid can only be fixed by removing laws and emulating nature.
As a whole no, nothing benefits society as a whole because only the smart ones figure out the correct use of things.  The dumb ones eventually fail to evolve.
Yes,  because the world needs ditch diggers also.    Cant dig ditches in prison.     Those who can--- lead,  those who cant--- follow. 
No,  they formed Led Zepplin   and 3 decades later monopolized the legal Marijuanna industry. 
It's the responsibility of the parents and if someone happens to have irresponsible parents who would smoke dope in front of their kids thats really stupid.  And as sad as it may be thats their problem and not the role of govt to fix it.   
Now you are speaking of medical marijuana which i do support to a degree. But those with a medical prescription have a need for it. And thus i am fine with.
If it isnt the role of the government to protect the greater society from the poor choices of the few that will directly affect someone else, then we dont need laws at all.

 

[darthtang aw]

Oh and no study has been able to link seconhand cig smoke with mental disorders or brain cell damage during development in children. If you want to pay for social safety nets for future children to allow a few to indulge in munchie driven ignorance i suppose it is ok then.

 

[2quills]

Tobacco is legal and yet we have few smokers today than in the past. How come?
The question for me isn't if alcohol or drugs are good or bad for someone. Clearly people do them regardless of the laws. The question for me is should tax payers continue to suffer for the problems associated with their use. Drugs are obviously big business for the major players. Why let them have it all when we could be capitalizing on it and distributing it in a manor that makes our streets and kids a little bit safer? Some people are always going to perpensity for self destruction. If they can't get in smack then they go huff a can of paint or drink some liquor.
Not everybody grows up a chain smoker, alcoholic, heroin addict or all of the above.

 

[beth]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397132/should-we-decriminalize-drugs-and-let-big-pharma-take-over-production#post_3538764
What happens to a child who grows up in a house with parents that regularly smoke pot? Enclosed space with child brains developing surrounded by pot smoke. This can't happen with alcohol. We bastardize cigarette smoke but turn around and champion a drug that has equally (if not more) harmful effects. the myth that Marijuana is natural is a crock. Just because it is natural does not mean the smoke isn't harmful in an equal amount of ways.
Parents who exercise that lack of judgment are also doing the same when they do smoke, or drink to excess daily. I support not regulating people's lives beyond what is absolutely necessary for a society. We can't control the dysfunction within families, nor should we try. Yes, there will be sad consequences for some, just as there are for children raised with alcoholics or people who can't put down a cigarette.

 

[darthtang aw]

Tobacco is legal and yet we have few smokers today than in the past. How come?
Because of the Nation wide campaign against smoking. The laws created to prevent cigarettes to being marketed to young as well. This has been a 30 year campaign. The last 10-20 years have been spent stating how weed isn't as bad as alcohol. Once weed is legal, how many of the younger generation will run out and purchase it? How many of those will become addicts? How many of those addicts will become the dreggs of society.
I find this comical.Those that show the greatest support for it only see the money it "could" bring. Early someone cited a cheaper cost for it if it were legal..yet, the colorado weed is three times above street value. Go figure.
The question for me isn't if alcohol or drugs are good or bad for someone. Clearly people do them regardless of the laws. The question for me is should tax payers continue to suffer for the problems associated with their use. Drugs are obviously big business for the major players. Why let them have it all when we could be capitalizing on it and distributing it in a manor that makes our streets and kids a little bit safer? Some people are always going to perpensity for self destruction. If they can't get in smack then they go huff a can of paint or drink some liquor.
Not everybody grows up a chain smoker, alcoholic, heroin addict or all of the above.
I mentioned several months back the moral decline of this country. The legalization of weed will not just affect the users...it will affect those around. How do you test for THC level of a vehicular wreck? There is no breath test for it. It has to be drawn by blood. which can stay in one's system for days....... So for the gain of a few dollars to ease some of our deficit (sorry folks this might reduce it by 2% if taxed) we are willing to put lives at risk on a grand scale. Lives and futures of those may never touch marijuana.
Marijuana is not the "safe" drug it is made out to be.
I have several friends that are responsible adults. Yes, they smoke occasionally. Most likely they would not fall into the category I speak of. However I have had friends that would spark up with kids asleep on the couch next to them. Infants. I have been on this planet a long time. I have been at the very bottom and seen some down right nasty crap. I have been at the top and still seen some down right nasty crap. It isn't just the "ignorant" drugs get a grip on and ruin lives. It is the lawyer, the doctor, etc. We once had a discussion if you would go to doctor or lawyer that was tattooed up. Most here said no. Would you hire a lawyer that smoked an eighth to a quarter a day? How about if you would allow a doctor to perform surgery on you that smoked that much a day. Weed slows down motor function and thought processing. If the answer is no....if weed were legal...you might have no choice. And would never know. Currently random drug screening minimize the odds of this happening in the proffesional world. If weed were legal, those drug screenings for THC would be no longer legal. As no private compnay can dictate if you consume on your own time a legal substance.
Again I ask you, the stoners in school you grew up with, were they the top of the class?

 

[2quills]

Because of the Nation wide campaign against smoking. The laws created to prevent cigarettes to being marketed to young as well. This has been a 30 year campaign. The last 10-20 years have been spent stating how weed isn't as bad as alcohol. Once weed is legal, how many of the younger generation will run out and purchase it? How many of those will become addicts? How many of those addicts will become the dreggs of society. You're ignoring a potential solution there. Decriminalize it but don't promote it. In fact, promote and educate against it and lobby accordingly. Lets not forget that as it stands now many young adults experiment with drugs or alcohol at some point. It's probably been a right of passage for thousands or years.
I find this comical.Those that show the greatest support for it only see the money it "could" bring. Early someone cited a cheaper cost for it if it were legal..yet, the colorado weed is three times above street value. Go figure. Yep, that's how business works when you're in it to make money. Is it generating tax revenue or is it supporting cartel and gang members? I'd rather get the roads fixed before I support people who really are pushing this stuff on kids. Cheaper weed lol.....that'll never happen. There has to be some give and take. Most would probably pay a little more if you dangle their freedom in front of them.
I mentioned several months back the moral decline of this country. The legalization of weed will not just affect the users...it will affect those around. How do you test for THC level of a vehicular wreck? There is no breath test for it. It has to be drawn by blood. which can stay in one's system for days....... So for the gain of a few dollars to ease some of our deficit (sorry folks this might reduce it by 2% if taxed) we are willing to put lives at risk on a grand scale. Lives and futures of those may never touch marijuana. You make it sound like this isn't a problem already. We wouldn't be having this discussion if the old ways were working. Nobody is actually legalizing it they just aren't going after the petty crime. Insurance companies will go after who ever caused the wreck like they normally do.
Marijuana is not the "safe" drug it is made out to be. Education matters and still applies.
I have several friends that are responsible adults. Yes, they smoke occasionally. Most likely they would not fall into the category I speak of. However I have had friends that would spark up with kids asleep on the couch next to them. Infants. I have been on this planet a long time. I have been at the very bottom and seen some down right nasty crap. I have been at the top and still seen some down right nasty crap. It isn't just the "ignorant" drugs get a grip on and ruin lives. It is the lawyer, the doctor, etc. We once had a discussion if you would go to doctor or lawyer that was tattooed up. Most here said no. Would you hire a lawyer that smoked an eighth to a quarter a day? How about if you would allow a doctor to perform surgery on you that smoked that much a day. Weed slows down motor function and thought processing. If the answer is no....if weed were legal...you might have no choice. And would never know. Currently random drug screening minimize the odds of this happening in the proffesional world. If weed were legal, those drug screenings for THC would be no longer legal. As no private compnay can dictate if you consume on your own time a legal substance. Again, companies don't have to change their hiring or employee maintenance practices. Completely different scenario than ink work or ones own perception of a moral decline.
Again I ask you, the stoners in school you grew up with, were they the top of the class? Chronic users, no. But I've been surprised over the years to sometimes find out who's done or tried what. Abuse is usually a sign of deeper psychological or physiological issues.
p.s. how come I can't change text color on my mobile device?:bw:

 

[phixer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397132/should-we-decriminalize-drugs-and-let-big-pharma-take-over-production#post_3538782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phixer http:///t/397132/should-we-decriminalize-drugs-and-let-big-pharma-take-over-production#post_3538780
The same thing that happens when a kid grows up in a house of cigarette smokers (which is legal, nicotine vs THC). The argument to make smoke illegal will not make people more responsible and should follow the same guidelines as child abuse. If the kid is under the age of 18 and found to have THC in their system or asthma related to second hand smoking it is the fault of the parents plain and simple.
Use existing laws to prosecute the parents for child endangerment and or contributing to a minor. But dont punish the 70 yo guy suffering from MS who may toke up to relieve his pain.
You cant fix stupid by imposing laws, stupid can only be fixed by removing laws and emulating nature.
As a whole no, nothing benefits society as a whole because only the smart ones figure out the correct use of things. The dumb ones eventually fail to evolve.
Yes, because the world needs ditch diggers also. Cant dig ditches in prison. Those who can--- lead, those who cant--- follow.
No, they formed Led Zepplin and 3 decades later monopolized the legal Marijuanna industry.
It's the responsibility of the parents and if someone happens to have irresponsible parents who would smoke dope in front of their kids thats really stupid. And as sad as it may be thats their problem and not the role of govt to fix it.
Now you are speaking of medical marijuana which i do support to a degree. But those with a medical prescription have a need for it. And thus i am fine with.
If it isnt the role of the government to protect the greater society from the poor choices of the few that will directly affect someone else, then we dont need laws at all.

The role of the govt should only be infrastructure and defense. Things that normally are too big to fund privately.
Yes exactly, thats the brainwashing that has taken place. There is no need for laws if you think about it. Cheetas dont need seatbelts or speeding tickets. Laws obstruct and hinder justice, they prevent harmony and the fear of enforcement of laws keeps the good people from taking out the bad ones.

For example: What keeps you from kicking the crap out of some bone thug who likes to rob people when you know that in doing so you would be benefiting society? Moraility? no way, laws do. What keeps convicted killers alive costing thousands when a .20 bullet would save thousands, laws do. What encourages big companies to pollute the environment and the food we eat, laws do because they complicate a simple process and allow them gridlock for years with appeals. Laws prevent people from fixing things the natural way. Like the honey badger does.

Since the criminals generally have no moral compass to begin with the laws dont pertain to them. What is legal and what is right are often in opposition. Laws restrict the freedom of good people.

 

[darthtang aw]

The role of the govt should only be infrastructure and defense.   Things that normally are too big to fund privately.  
Yes exactly,  thats the brainwashing that has taken place.   There is no need for laws if you think about it.   Cheetas dont need seatbelts or speeding tickets.    Laws obstruct and hinder justice, they prevent harmony and the fear of enforcement of laws keeps the good people from taking out the bad ones.  
For example:  What keeps you from kicking the crap out of some bone thug who likes to rob people when you know that in doing so you would be benefiting society?   Moraility?  no way,  laws do.   What keeps convicted killers alive costing thousands when a .20 bullet would save thousands,  laws do.   What encourages big companies to pollute the environment and the food we eat,   laws do because they complicate a simple process and allow them gridlock for years with appeals.  Laws prevent people from fixing things the natural way.    Like the honey badger does.   
Since the criminals generally have no moral compass to begin with the laws dont pertain to them.     What is legal and what is right are often in opposition.   Laws restrict the freedom of good people.  
Cheetahs also don't alter their chemical make up in their brain. Cheetahs also operate purely on instinct. What you seem to always propose is a state of Anarchy.
Laws do restrict and prevent most people from committing crimes. While some laws do restrict freedoms they also protect freedoms from those that would take those freedoms away. Primarily the right to life. Name a single society that has ever flourished and maintained without laws that protect people.Laws keep society civil. Name a single law that encourages pollution to the environment and contamination to the food we eat.
Without laws, the criiminals will no longer be criminals. They will be the greater society. A man steals from me that which I have earned. Since their is no law there is no civil recourse. So inturn I attack the man I think stole from me. During my attack and attempt to recover that which was stolen, I kill a child and the individuals wife. Potentially of an an innocent family as I only assume they stole my goods.
Even Native American tribes had laws that were adhered to within the tribe. The same for the aboriganese (Sp?). I recommend a trip to the poorest nations of Africa. Where the rule of law is basically kill or be killed as you suggest. There is a reason those areas are still poor. There is a reason those areas remain 4th world countries. Not because they have limited resources and no major industry. But because the lack of law creating a civil society has not allowed the nation to evolve into this technological age of industry and prosperity.
Crap, now I sound Liberal.

 

[theclemsonkid]

If we are going to toss all laws out the widow...

Let's put a ring of AK-47's one half mile in radius in all major metro ares with more than 100,000 people. In the middle, let's put boatloads of cash, meth, and other illicit drugs. Give everyone 24 hours warning to get out of the way if they choose, and let nature take its course!

 

[phixer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397132/should-we-decriminalize-drugs-and-let-big-pharma-take-over-production#post_3538816
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phixer http:///t/397132/should-we-decriminalize-drugs-and-let-big-pharma-take-over-production#post_3538803
The role of the govt should only be infrastructure and defense. Things that normally are too big to fund privately.
Yes exactly, thats the brainwashing that has taken place. There is no need for laws if you think about it. Cheetas dont need seatbelts or speeding tickets. Laws obstruct and hinder justice, they prevent harmony and the fear of enforcement of laws keeps the good people from taking out the bad ones.
For example: What keeps you from kicking the crap out of some bone thug who likes to rob people when you know that in doing so you would be benefiting society? Moraility? no way, laws do. What keeps convicted killers alive costing thousands when a .20 bullet would save thousands, laws do. What encourages big companies to pollute the environment and the food we eat, laws do because they complicate a simple process and allow them gridlock for years with appeals. Laws prevent people from fixing things the natural way. Like the honey badger does.
Since the criminals generally have no moral compass to begin with the laws dont pertain to them. What is legal and what is right are often in opposition. Laws restrict the freedom of good people.
Cheetahs also don't alter their chemical make up in their brain. Cheetahs also operate purely on instinct. What you seem to always propose is a state of Anarchy.
Laws do restrict and prevent most people from committing crimes. While some laws do restrict freedoms they also protect freedoms from those that would take those freedoms away. Primarily the right to life. Name a single society that has ever flourished and maintained without laws that protect people.Laws keep society civil. Name a single law that encourages pollution to the environment and contamination to the food we eat.
Without laws, the criiminals will no longer be criminals. They will be the greater society. A man steals from me that which I have earned. Since their is no law there is no civil recourse. So inturn I attack the man I think stole from me. During my attack and attempt to recover that which was stolen, I kill a child and the individuals wife. Potentially of an an innocent family as I only assume they stole my goods.
Even Native American tribes had laws that were adhered to within the tribe. The same for the aboriganese (Sp?). I recommend a trip to the poorest nations of Africa. Where the rule of law is basically kill or be killed as you suggest. There is a reason those areas are still poor. There is a reason those areas remain 4th world countries. Not because they have limited resources and no major industry. But because the lack of law creating a civil society has not allowed the nation to evolve into this technological age of industry and prosperity.
Crap, now I sound Liberal.
p>
"The Matrix is a system, That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it."



Liberalism is a mental illness, your pretty sharp I wouldn't worry about that.

I believe that the laws of man should follow the laws of nature and that our departure from them is the source of our problems.

There are so many examples I dont know where to start. There are literally at least 20 examples off the top of my head so I'll post a link of a few:

http://higherperspective.com/2014/01/8-animals-love-getting-high.html

and dont forget about catnip.

Check out determinism and self preservation and then ask if we as humans also operate off of instinct or free-will. The functions that keep us alive are instinctive. Anarchy is just a scary sounding word for harmony, once again look at nature where there are no laws.
No other form of perfect harmony exists.

Just a single society? thats easy , how about all of them... nature and the animals were here before man and will be here after. Laws enslave people and promote crime by restricting good people from taking out the bad ones.

A single law that encourages pollution of food contamination , how about 2 or 3. The clean water act. Ever heard of fluoridation by municipal water treatment plants? Know the story behind it and what flouride actually does to human bone marrow over time?

Or do you mean the laws that provided immunity to Rocky Flats weapons facility allowing them to burn and bury toxic radio active waste due to their security classification. It wasnt until people started developing cancer until they were investigated.

And when it comes to industry they simply wait until they get sued and then tie up the process for years using existing laws of appeals and due process against itself. And how about the worst one of them all the law that makes abortion legal. Abortion can be pretty bad for your health if your an unborn child.

Criminals are criminals irregardless of laws. Laws dont make people rightous or keep them honest. Do laws make you honest? or are you honest whether they exist or not.

They shouldnt have stolen from you and now his wife and kid wont either. Good job, sounds like justice was served and saved the taxpayer the burden. You shouldnt attack them unless you are certain though. The pre-existing laws didnt prevent you from getting robbed in the first place.

When the hyenas steal from the lyons they get dealt with and so they dont steal from the lyons.


"Even Native American tribes had laws that were adhered to within the tribe. The same for the aboriganese (Sp?). I recommend a trip to the poorest nations of Africa. Where the rule of law is basically kill or be killed as you suggest. There is a reason those areas are still poor. There is a reason those areas remain 4th world countries. Not because they have limited resources and no major industry. But because the lack of law creating a civil society has not allowed the nation to evolve into this technological age of industry and prosperity."

And all of them vanished to miniscule #s when confronted with a superior opponent (Europeans and disease) Survival of the fittest.
Africa, been there when on active duty... is Djibouti poor enough?

The reason they are still poor is due to over population plain and simple. They do not have enough resources to sustain them, but they are too stupid to know they should stop breeding. What they are doing is breeding themselves into extinction, poverty is natures way of telling them to stop breeding. Same as India. Not due to lack of education, or not enough laws or a developed govt or being oppressed by "THE MAN".
It's the other way around in these areas, people have less kids when they are educated and when dealing with an already over populated society you must do both as an individual, stop breeding and read a book. When in a hole, stop digging.

 

[phixer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheClemsonKid http:///t/397132/should-we-decriminalize-drugs-and-let-big-pharma-take-over-production#post_3538844
If we are going to toss all laws out the widow...

Let's put a ring of AK-47's one half mile in radius in all major metro ares with more than 100,000 people. In the middle, let's put boatloads of cash, meth, and other illicit drugs. Give everyone 24 hours warning to get out of the way if they choose, and let nature take its course!
A less violent way would be to just take the safety labels off everything, eliminate all forms of welfare and let the problem solve itself. Retards and morons will naturally go the route of the Dodo bird...

No more seat belts, airbags, crosswalks, gun restrictions, traffic lights or speed limits... what a perfect world.