• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

3 arguments for prohibition

Much of this, as the speaker pointed out, is very old news. What we have now is a system that resists change since enitire industries have come into being specifically to fight the war on drugs. On the keep them banned side you have conservative morons, drug makers/distributors/dealers (profits are now very, very high and untaxed), the alcohol industry (they hate competition), lawyers, police (they get much added booty from asset forfeiture), courts and other offshoots of the criminal justice system like jailers, councelors, rehab centers, probation/parole officers. On the make them legal side you have liberal morons, drug users and perhaps the tobacco companies (they need something else to roll, package and sell).
 
I liked the video, although the only point that is still used by the drug warriors is what they're now calling "anti-motivational disorder". I don't like his strategy for that point; whether you "should" be productive or not isn't really a point of contention; Most people have already established the axiom that unproductive lifestyles are bad, and you'll probably never change that belief. It's much more useful to prove that drug users are productive, because they are.
 
I liked the video, although the only point that is still used by the drug warriors is what they're now calling "anti-motivational disorder". I don't like his strategy for that point; whether you "should" be productive or not isn't really a point of contention; Most people have already established the axiom that unproductive lifestyles are bad, and you'll probably never change that belief. It's much more useful to prove that drug users are productive, because they are.

I didn't watch the video- bandwidth is an issue with my satellite service but I've got an anecdote about drug users being productive.
I was a structural Ironworker for about 30 years, and a connector for most of that time. I had a partner on a job, a boilerhouse with about a quarter million tons of steel going 240 feet high, who as a junkie. He'd toke up when he woke up, toke again at lunch time and chip away with a needle in the evening. He was a good partner in the air, had all the skills and nerves like you wouldn't believe. Only thing was, if there was a decision to make I had to make it, but drug addiction didn't make him unproductive.
He died of an overdose in Toronto, I'm told, but that's not germane to the discussion. And anecdotal evidence is never a rebuttal to statistics, but I'm not sure if statistics even enters the discussion.
 
I found the video to be shallow and based on the fallacy that because there used to be some people who used bad arguments to support a certain position, that position must be wrong

If that were true, then his use of a fallacy would mean that drugs should remain illegal.
 
I didn't watch the video- bandwidth is an issue with my satellite service but I've got an anecdote about drug users being productive.
I was a structural Ironworker for about 30 years, and a connector for most of that time. I had a partner on a job, a boilerhouse with about a quarter million tons of steel going 240 feet high, who as a junkie. He'd toke up when he woke up, toke again at lunch time and chip away with a needle in the evening. He was a good partner in the air, had all the skills and nerves like you wouldn't believe. Only thing was, if there was a decision to make I had to make it, but drug addiction didn't make him unproductive.
He died of an overdose in Toronto, I'm told, but that's not germane to the discussion. And anecdotal evidence is never a rebuttal to statistics, but I'm not sure if statistics even enters the discussion.
I've lost friends too. It's a big slap in the face when people talk about prohibition as if it saves lives, because it certainly didn't save any of the people I know who died under prohibition. It's because of the drug war culture that so many people have to hide their behavior, and it often leads to hiding the warning sign that could have saved them. It's not such an issue with marijuana, but all drugs are connected through prohibition; the places that have legalized marijuana have seen OD rates drop for all drugs. Simply legalizing marijuana would save lives.
 
Simply legalizing marijuana would save lives.

Agreed. Making it illegal only supports death and big anti-drug business.
 
Back
Top Bottom