But I always think the libertarian “just legalise all the drugs” is just odd.
Regulated? So you mean preventing people from taking really stupid shit? Sounds great sign me up lol
People gotta accept there are trade-offs to living in a society, and one of those is that there’s a limit to which we allow each other to get high. Because there are some drugs that make people aggressive, and I personally think these ought to be curtailed where possible. (Again, not a “war on drugs” style curtailment. But distribution, still illegal and criminal)
You wanna take shit like meth? Cool, go out to the woods and never use socialised medicine where workers are at risk from people on such drugs, or just randoms walking down the street.
I don’t think taking hard drugs should put you in prison, or even give you a criminal record, but actually legalising the distribution? Nah. Go live in the woods/hills away from everyone else.
Because there are some drugs that make people aggressive, and I personally think these ought to be curtailed where possible. (Again, not a “war on drugs” style curtailment. But distribution, still illegal and criminal)
The first such drug that comes to my mind is alcohol. Its distribution was also criminalized in the past, eventually leading to an increase in organized crime.
I don’t really fully agree with the person you are responding too, but the level of aggression brought about from Meth use is significantly more potent and consistent compared to Alcohol, which is a little more variable depending on the person using it.
There is of course nuance to this, and I don’t claim to be an expert on classifying drugs. Though, I don’t reckon I need to try to hard to argue that there are drugs far worse than alcohol out there. I’m simply stating a blanket “all drugs should be legal” is overkill.
Drug criminalization pushes use into the shadows so that the most visible use is from those who are very loud and disruptive with it. I know you think you’re righteous with your “i don’t reckon i need to try to(sic) hard to argue” but you are operating on assumptions about substances borne of ignorance.
I don’t know if Meth use should constitute total exile from society, especially if you are trying to get off of it. Its a highly addictive drug and usually people use it because of a state of being deprived and desperate of any joy in life.
This is a misunderstanding, apologies. I’m saying if you’re advocating complete legalisation of distribution of every single drug out there, then I’m using hyperbole to point out that this is too much “freedom to” without considering “freedom from”.
Decriminalised use/possession, for sure.
But I always think the libertarian “just legalise all the drugs” is just odd.
Regulated? So you mean preventing people from taking really stupid shit? Sounds great sign me up lol
People gotta accept there are trade-offs to living in a society, and one of those is that there’s a limit to which we allow each other to get high. Because there are some drugs that make people aggressive, and I personally think these ought to be curtailed where possible. (Again, not a “war on drugs” style curtailment. But distribution, still illegal and criminal)
You wanna take shit like meth? Cool, go out to the woods and never use socialised medicine where workers are at risk from people on such drugs, or just randoms walking down the street.
I don’t think taking hard drugs should put you in prison, or even give you a criminal record, but actually legalising the distribution? Nah. Go live in the woods/hills away from everyone else.
The first such drug that comes to my mind is alcohol. Its distribution was also criminalized in the past, eventually leading to an increase in organized crime.
I don’t really fully agree with the person you are responding too, but the level of aggression brought about from Meth use is significantly more potent and consistent compared to Alcohol, which is a little more variable depending on the person using it.
There is of course nuance to this, and I don’t claim to be an expert on classifying drugs. Though, I don’t reckon I need to try to hard to argue that there are drugs far worse than alcohol out there. I’m simply stating a blanket “all drugs should be legal” is overkill.
Alcohol certainly is ripe for abuse, also.
Drug criminalization pushes use into the shadows so that the most visible use is from those who are very loud and disruptive with it. I know you think you’re righteous with your “i don’t reckon i need to try to(sic) hard to argue” but you are operating on assumptions about substances borne of ignorance.
I’m not arguing for criminalisation of use and posession.
Just making distribution of all drugs legal is overkill, in my opinion
I don’t know if Meth use should constitute total exile from society, especially if you are trying to get off of it. Its a highly addictive drug and usually people use it because of a state of being deprived and desperate of any joy in life.
This is a misunderstanding, apologies. I’m saying if you’re advocating complete legalisation of distribution of every single drug out there, then I’m using hyperbole to point out that this is too much “freedom to” without considering “freedom from”.
I think all drug use should be decriminalised.