Crack and cocaine are two different drugs. Crack is way worse than cocaine. I said cocaine and not crack for a reason.
I am kind of amused by people who think their lives are so inadequate that they have to enhance them eith drugs (either illegal or legal).
I don't do illegal drugs. I also don't drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes. (No, I am NOT Baptist)
The way I see it, with legality comes commercialization. Will advertising be banned?
Who will produce it?
The fact is it will quickly become a lucrative practice. Do you think capitalism and commercialization will not come into play if it is legalized?
They're two different forms of the same drug.
I've tried crack a few times; I haven't experienced it as being "way worse".
It's similar to the high one gets from injecting coke, but it wears off almost immediately; maybe 30 seconds or a minute (maybe longer; my recollection is that it's a hella short high), followed by a crash.
If it's "way worse", that's merely because it's so cheap that it's easy to get addicted.
So its not the drug that's addicting, its the effect the drug has on the user? That's fine if you wish to clarify. To be honest crime, robbery, and murder are not my reasoning for banning drugs such as Cocaine. It is the adverse effects they have on a person's role in society. Most people who do hard drugs become a burden on society and (i believe) waste their personal worth away on getting "high".
Do you also believe the government has no obligation to protect the consumer from fraud and producer negligence.
Would you legalize Cocaine and then have the government oversee its purity to make sure you don't die from a bad dose?
I am kind of amused by people who think their lives are so inadequate that they have to enhance them eith drugs (either illegal or legal).
I don't do illegal drugs. I also don't drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes. (No, I am NOT Baptist)
"I am kind of amused by people who think their lives are so inadequate that they have to enhance them by debating politics online"
"I am kind of amused by people who think their lives are so inadequate that they have to enhance them by traveling around the world"
"I am kind of amused by people who think their lives are so inadequate that they have to enhance them by building relationships and making friends"
"I am kind of amused by people who think their lives are so inadequate that they have to enhance them by playing video games"
They're two different forms of the same drug.
I've tried crack a few times; I haven't experienced it as being "way worse".
It's similar to the high one gets from injecting coke, but it wears off almost immediately; maybe 30 seconds or a minute (maybe longer; my recollection is that it's a hella short high), followed by a crash.
If it's "way worse", that's merely because it's so cheap that it's easy to get addicted.
Thats the only way to go! Not to use legal nor illegal drugs..
Best drug I know is to work out my body and mind with exercise.
It is with cigarettes for the most part.
Would it matter? If the production is regulated and paid for by the taxes on the final product, who really cares?
Capitalism is already a factor. It's just currently unregulated. The people who make the money are organized crime and gangs.
Individuals are not beholden to some arbitrary conception of a social role. So long as I take responsibility for my actions and refrain from infringing on your rights I am to be left alone. If a person chooses to destroy their life by using a drug it is not for you or anyone else to forcibly compel them to stop, however, if their usage impugns the rights of others then the State has a legitimate interest in managing their behavior.
No. The government has the authority to regulate commerce per the Commerce Clause. However, this does not entail the criminalization of commerce on the basis that it is unwholesome. The only type of commerce the government has the authority to criminalize is any commerce that results in the inherent violation of others' rights; for instance, contract killing.
Yes. The government has a legitimate interest in overseeing the quality of a product both in terms of manufacturing and distribution.
I am kind of amused by people who think their lives are so inadequate that they have to enhance them eith drugs (either illegal or legal).
Your naivete towards illegal substances is apparent.
Your naivete towards exercise and a good book is apparent.
Not at all! I love reading. I read a book a week. I have found use for both of those things as well as illegal substances. My desire to try illegal substances was not due to a void in my life which needed filling. It was and is purely for philosophical and existential reasons.
That is what I do. I do a short workout with dumbells in the morning, I commute to work on the bike, run about 20 miles a week and am training for marathons and triathlons. That gives me all the "high" I need.
Do you think your circumstances accurately reflect those of the vast majority of illegal drug users?
So the government has a right to criminalize the distribution of Cocaine (to protect consumers from its adverse effects) but not the right prevent you from producing and consuming it for personal purposes. I'd be fine with that.
No. First of all the government does not have rights, only individuals do, second, the government does not have the authority to criminalize the distribution of cocaine on the basis that its consumption may prove hazardous to a user. The government has a legitimate interest in regulating (not criminalizing) its production and distribution but only insofar as it endeavors to assure quality and transparency.
Companies would be held to the same standards of quality and transparency as any other manufacturer of goods and services. Warning labels, quality control, health standards, etc.
I could not have put it better myself.
Erroneous! Erroneous on all counts! You are far more lucid than I...
No. First of all the government does not have rights, only individuals do, second, the government does not have the authority to criminalize the distribution of cocaine on the basis that its consumption may prove hazardous to a user. The government has a legitimate interest in regulating (not criminalizing) its production and distribution but only insofar as it endeavors to assure quality and transparency.
Companies would be held to the same standards of quality and transparency as any other manufacturer of goods and services. Warning labels, quality control, health standards, etc.
No. First of all the government does not have rights, only individuals do, second, the government does not have the authority to criminalize the distribution of cocaine on the basis that its consumption may prove hazardous to a user. The government has a legitimate interest in regulating (not criminalizing) its production and distribution but only insofar as it endeavors to assure quality and transparency.
Companies would be held to the same standards of quality and transparency as any other manufacturer of goods and services. Warning labels, quality control, health standards, etc.
I thought the government prohibited the production and sale of faulty products all the time in the interest of the consumer.
Given there has been little medical study on the effects of illegal drugs compared with other consumed products, let me propose a couple hypothetical situations.
1. The FDA thoroughly tests Cocaine and deems it has similar risks/effects to Alcohol and Cigarettes, thus placing similar regulations on it.
2. The FDA thoroughly tests Cocaine and deems it significantly more risky and even dangerous to the consumer. Do they not then have the authority to criminalize the production for distribution and distribution of it?
I am kind of amused by people who think their lives are so inadequate that they have to enhance them eith drugs (either illegal or legal).
I don't do illegal drugs. I also don't drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes. (No, I am NOT Baptist)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?