legalise weed? yes or no?

[ColonelCossack]

what is the people think about legalising weed, or any drugs for that matter?

[tracher999]

ligelize weed today some people need it its good agaist pain en a lot off other things

medical canabiss 4 everyone

420

greetz

[Hexen]

Weed can only be legalized under socialism/communism.

[gorillafuck]

Weed can only be legalized under socialism/communism.
That's very blatantly not true. Weed is legal in certain places.

That's actually just downright ridiculous.

For the OP: Yeah I support legalizing weed.

[Delirium]

can we move this crap out of S/E.

oh and of course we should legalize marijauna, with pardons for all people imprisioned for marijana offenses.

[PhoenixAsh]

yes. :-)

[Blackscare]

ligelize weed today some people need it its good agaist pain en a lot off other things

medical canabiss 4 everyone

420

greetz

I support the legalization of marijuana, being a smoker myself, but this post could serve as a compelling argument against legalization :lol:

[ColonelCossack]

im not looking for ideological or philosphical reasons... i know that it should be legalised, along with many other drugs.

I just want to know about all of the SCIENTIFIC arguments! after all, this is S/E!

[Quail]

I support legalisation of all drugs. It would be the best way to help addicts (there would be less stigma surrounding drug addiction and people wouldn't be as afraid to talk it their doctor about it due to breaking the law), to prevent the crime associated with the black market (such as gang-related crime), make drugs safer for people to take (they would be regulated and so they wouldn't get cut with dangerous shite) and it would also allow people to get unbiased information about drugs (because drugs are illegal, the drugs education in schools only tells people "drugs are dangerous, don't do them" as opposed to giving people information about doing them safely. Telling young people to have a sitter when they take hallucinogenics, for example, could probably save lives, but if that was taught in schools it would be seen as promoting an illegal activity).

This topic has been done to death on revleft. If you use the search function you should be able to find a variety of threads about drugs and leglisation.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

I don't think any drugs should be illegal. After all, they are merely substances that are put into the body that give psychological and physical effects of different varieties. I don't see how one person has the justified right to tell another person what chemicals he or she can put into his or her body. The problems that addicts face could be dealt with far easier if those who fall victim to drug addiction were treated as victims and not criminals.

There are broad areas of debate regarding how the economy of drugs relate to capitalism that I'm sure will be explored.

For what reasons are drugs outlawed? Is it because they are harmful to the body? If so, what makes marijuana less worthy of legality than prozac? Or alcohol, which has been consistently noted as being one of the most harmful chemicals to indulge in recreationally by experts? I do not think it is because drugs are harmful to the body, we have access to many potentially harmful things; terrible and unhealthy food, cheap (low quality) alcohol, prescription drugs and nicotine, just to name a few. In this sense, there is a double standard in anti-drug legislation, and I'm sure more illustrative posters will be able to give you some good explanations. Some drugs are obviously more harmful than others, as with foods, but the biggest problems that come from drugs, on a personal and societal level, come from the legislation behind drugs.

Legalization is important with regards to drugs, but the most important things are education and support for those who require it.

[ColonelCossack]

I don't think any drugs should be illegal. After all, they are merely substances that are put into the body that give psychological and physical effects of different varieties. I don't see how one person has the justified right to tell another person what chemicals he or she can put into his or her body.

There are broad areas of debate regarding how the economy of drugs relate to capitalism that I'm sure will be explored.

For what reasons are drugs outlawed? Is it because they are harmful to the body? If so, what makes marijuana less worthy of legality than prozac? Or alcohol, which has been consistently noted as being one of the most harmful chemicals to indulge in recreationally by experts? I do not think it is because drugs are harmful to the body, we have access to many potentially harmful things; terrible and unhealthy food, cheap (low quality) alcohol, prescription drugs and nictotine, just to name a few. In this sense, there is a double standard in anti-drug legislation, and I'm sure more illustrative posters will be able to give you some good explanations.
i agree; and so does my 61 year old grandmother

[Catillina]

I think men should choose themselves what they consume and what not(of course being told the exact consequences of the product which they consume).
And yeah, legalizing Weed would be realy good, cause then people wont do Shit Drugs which you get legal, but who are a lot more dangerous.

[ColonelCossack]

I don't think any drugs should be illegal. After all, they are merely substances that are put into the body that give psychological and physical effects of different varieties. I don't see how one person has the justified right to tell another person what chemicals he or she can put into his or her body.

There are broad areas of debate regarding how the economy of drugs relate to capitalism that I'm sure will be explored.

For what reasons are drugs outlawed? Is it because they are harmful to the body? If so, what makes marijuana less worthy of legality than prozac? Or alcohol, which has been consistently noted as being one of the most harmful chemicals to indulge in recreationally by experts? I do not think it is because drugs are harmful to the body, we have access to many potentially harmful things; terrible and unhealthy food, cheap (low quality) alcohol, prescription drugs and nictotine, just to name a few. In this sense, there is a double standard in anti-drug legislation, and I'm sure more illustrative posters will be able to give you some good explanations.

I agree; and so does my 61 year old grandmother

[Jack]

Smoke weed erry day.

[Quail]

And yeah, legalizing Weed would be realy good, cause then people wont do Shit Drugs which you get legal, but who are a lot more dangerous.
This is actually a good point. Because drugs are illegal, people take newer substances that nobody really knows the long-term effects of.

[dasredtelephone]

cannabis should be legalized, there is no question there. as for harder drugs, as long as they are not harmful they should be legalized. things such as cocaine, heroin, etc. should be decriminalized with mandatory rehabilitation after a certan number of offenses.

but that's just my opinion.

[NGNM85]

Like I said in the last thread evoted to this subject;
A 2006 study that was fairly substantial, (Over 2,000 subjects, which is really the kind of numbers you need to conduct a substantive medical study.) debuted at a gathering of the American Thoracic Society (They have the best parties, maaan.:D) concluded that there was, quote;
“no association whatsoever between marijuana use, or frequency of marijuana use and lung, neck, or head cancers.” However, pot smoke does contain two carcinogens, tar and benzopyrene, which are also found in commercial cigarettes. However, commercial cigarettes also contain more than 30 additional carcinogens. So, I would say regular pot smoking might very well increase your likelihood to develop lung cancer, but there's no comparison. It's a favorite talking point in anti-drug rhetoric and literature that pot is just as bad as cigarettes, or (Usually.) worse. Anybody who tells you that has no idea what they are talking about, or they are fucking lying to you. Pot's effect on the brain is a little more complicated. However, to break it down to simplest terms; cannabis is one of the most benign drugs in the pharmacopia. Thousands of Americans die from over-the-counter medications every year. (In addition to the thousands who die from perscribed drugs.) For christs' sake cannabis doesn't even have a Lethal Dose. ('LD') There are decades of medical studies that have confirmed this, including, arguably, the most famous studies; the LaGuardia commission in the 50's, and the Nixon comission in the 70's, both of which concluded that there was so scientific reason for prohibiting cannabis. Look, all else being equal, the person who doesn't smoke pot is going to be healthier, every time. However, as I said, it's one of the most benign drugs in existence, and there is no moral, scientific, or social justification for our present laws regarding cannabis, whatsoever.

[Jimmie Higgins]

This is actually a good point. Because drugs are illegal, people take newer substances that nobody really knows the long-term effects of.Or huff paint, glue, gas, VCR cleaner, aerosol spray, whip-cream cans, etc or take cough-syrup, Dramamine or nutmeg. Teenagers are always doing that shit or stealing prescription pills largely due to having shit connections to "real" drugs. So the next time you see a kid, please warn him of the dangers of huffing and give him the number to your pot or e dealer :lol:. "The more you know..."

That's a joke, internet, just a joke.

But in seriousness, I agree with what people have been saying. There should be no regulations on it under capitalism, and all the prisoners should be released and the ability for cops to stop people and search for drugs should also be taken away. Weed as a law-enforcement issue is much larger than just the drug - it's a scapegoat for larger systemic problems, it's an excuse for cops to repress or harass or profile people.

[Lucretia]

Drugs should be decriminalised but not considered good or their use desirable.

[Rottenfruit]

what is the people think about legalising weed, or any drugs for that matter?
Legalalize it, How can it be a crime to use any drug? Is it a crime to eat unhealthy food? Makes as much sense to me

[F9]

Prohibition of (any)drugs make no absolute sense.Even the ones supporting the prohibition their arguments are based on false "facts" and they are misguiding the public.
So legalization or not?Of course legalization!

[Salyut]

Marijuana is evil. One puff and bang: communism. If it's legalized we'll see the youth of $nation turn into hordes of crazed godless Reds.

Actually in all seriousness... I believe it has saved my life.

[Die Rote Fahne]

Legalize all drugs, regulate soft drugs, and pin severe punishments or life in prison with no parole to those who sell hard drugs.

[Salyut]

Legalize all drugs, regulate soft drugs, and pin severe punishments or life in prison with no parole to those who sell hard drugs.

What falls under 'hard drugs'?

[southernmissfan]

Legalize all drugs, regulate soft drugs, and pin severe punishments or life in prison with no parole to those who sell hard drugs.

So if all drugs are legal, how do you then imprison people who sell certain drugs? Not exactly legal is it?

[Political_Chucky]

So if all drugs are legal, how do you then imprison people who sell certain drugs? Not exactly legal is it?

what?

[Bright Banana Beard]

Illegalize the drugs that proved to be very addictive such as heroin, cocaine, opiate, and meth.

The rest can be legalize, including psychedelic drugs, marijuana, khat, etc.

Instead of jail, get them to the rehab.

[Quail]

Illegalize the drugs that proved to be very addictive such as heroin, cocaine, opiate, and meth.

The rest can be legalize, including psychedelic drugs, marijuana, khat, etc.

Instead of jail, get them to the rehab.
Where do you draw the line between "somewhat addictive" and "very addictive"? If some drugs are still illegal, there will be a black market for them so there will be gang-related crime.
Also, for people to recover from an addiction, they need a supportive environment, not forced rehab. Recovery generally fails if someone is forced into it when they don't want it. People also aren't exactly going to be willing to talk to their doctor about their drug problem if they think they're going to be forced into rehab or be "told off" for doing something illegal.

[gorillafuck]

I'm hesitant on the idea of workers councils making and distributing crystal meth.

[L.A.P.]

I think the better question is whether you would smoke in front of a DEA agent if it did get legalized.

[southernmissfan]

what?

Sorry if I wasn't clear. Hailtothethief said that all drugs should be legal. Then she/he said there should be severe punishments (such as life in prison) for selling "hard drugs". Obviously the two don't match up. If all drugs are legal, you can't go to jail for selling some drugs. His/her position makes no sense.

Some people in this thread fail to recognize that prohibition is far more harmful than any side effects of any drug. As dangerous as meth, heroin and other "hard" drugs are, prohibition does not solve the problem. In fact, it makes it much worse. Anything less than full legalization, real drug education (as opposed to propaganda or misinformation) and a free, comprehensive rehab system will not solve the problem.

EDIT: In addition, the social roots of addiction and drug use can probably never be completely mitigated and certainly can't under capitalism.

[Bright Banana Beard]

Where do you draw the line between "somewhat addictive" and "very addictive" This will be decided by the workers council in collobration with medical group that studied drugs.


If some drugs are still illegal, there will be a black market for them so there will be gang-related crime. I was speaking in transitional society and not under capitalism, sorry for not making it clear.

Also, for people to recover from an addiction, they need a supportive environment, not forced rehab. Recovery generally fails if someone is forced into it when they don't want it. People also aren't exactly going to be willing to talk to their doctor about their drug problem if they think they're going to be forced into rehab or be "told off" for doing something illegal.
This is mostly because of alienation of current society. Basically, I think we need to seperate the issue of personal use and production use. I basically allow personal use because it is personal.

Beside hard drugs decision will change overtime. Meth doesn't have any medical use.

[Political_Chucky]

Yeah now it makes sense. I thought you were contradicting yourself haha.

Another main point though are how harmful these synthetic drugs pharmaceutical companies make such as Adderall, Zoloft, and Xanax which can utterly be taken off the market if ecstasy, and marijuana were much more accessible and used responsibly. It also doesn't help that street drugs are not as safe as they could be if the big pharmaceutical companies were distributing them.

[Political_Chucky]

Beside hard drugs decision will change overtime. Meth doesn't have any medical use.

Desoxyn, a prescription form of methamphetamine, is prescribed as a temporary treatment for obesity. Even if its illegalized, drugs will still find their way on the market to be used, whether for production reasons(such as big business) or for personal use. Its idiotic to outlaw something someone clearly wants.

[Spawn of Stalin]

My opinion is simple: Currently illegal drugs should remain illegal, and we should add certain alcoholic drinks to that list as well. Those caught in the act of using drugs however should face little or no consequences, while those selling them should be cracked down on, hard. I'm an advocate of capital punishment for drug dealers, no three strikes, no warnings, no second chances, nothing, there was a point in my life when I believed that a drug dealer caught red handed shouldn't even get a trial, I still don't think they deserve one, but that they should have one anyway just because carrying out punishments without a trial is, well, illegal under international law. The drug dealer is the lowest of the low, the ultimate capitalist.

I've thought long and hard about the legalisation/regulation route, and while it makes sense from the standpoint that it would eliminate the illegal drug trade, I don't believe this to be the case. If there is a black market for DVDs, jewellery, and "Nike" trainers, there will be a black market for drugs too whether it is legal or illegal, people will always want their fix cheaper, they will want it stronger, without state imposed regulations. Just as there is a massive illegal weapons trade in the US (a country where it is perfectly legal to own and operate a plethora of firearms) there will be an illegal drug trade in any country where drugs are legalised.

Thankfully I'm 99% certain that I'll be long dead before we see a Britain where all drugs are legalised as some people advocate. I don't want to live in that world. Frankly drugs are a big issue for me, I am in support of a war on drugs, just not the current one.

[Blackscare]

My opinion is simple: Currently illegal drugs should remain illegal, and we should add certain alcoholic drinks to that list as well. Those caught in the act of using drugs however should face little or no consequences, while those selling them should be cracked down on, hard. I'm an advocate of capital punishment for drug dealers, no three strikes, no warnings, no second chances, nothing, there was a point in my life when I believed that a drug dealer caught red handed shouldn't even get a trial, I still don't think they deserve one, but that they should have one anyway just because carrying out punishments without a trial is, well, illegal under international law. The drug dealer is the lowest of the low, the ultimate capitalist.


So you're saying a person who sells weed should be put to death? It's great watching right-wing reactionaries masquerade as Leftists by hiding behind Stalin. :laugh:

[Stranger Than Paradise]

My opinion is simple: Currently illegal drugs should remain illegal, and we should add certain alcoholic drinks to that list as well. Those caught in the act of using drugs however should face little or no consequences, while those selling them should be cracked down on, hard. I'm an advocate of capital punishment for drug dealers, no three strikes, no warnings, no second chances, nothing, there was a point in my life when I believed that a drug dealer caught red handed shouldn't even get a trial, I still don't think they deserve one, but that they should have one anyway just because carrying out punishments without a trial is, well, illegal under international law. The drug dealer is the lowest of the low, the ultimate capitalist.

I've thought long and hard about the legalisation/regulation route, and while it makes sense from the standpoint that it would eliminate the illegal drug trade, I don't believe this to be the case. If there is a black market for DVDs, jewellery, and "Nike" trainers, there will be a black market for drugs too whether it is legal or illegal, people will always want their fix cheaper, they will want it stronger, without state imposed regulations. Just as there is a massive illegal weapons trade in the US (a country where it is perfectly legal to own and operate a plethora of firearms) there will be an illegal drug trade in any country where drugs are legalised.

Thankfully I'm 99% certain that I'll be long dead before we see a Britain where all drugs are legalised as some people advocate. I don't want to live in that world. Frankly drugs are a big issue for me, I am in support of a war on drugs, just not the current one.

I was eagerly anticipating your post when I saw it was the last post in this thread. Obviously I think this question is based on Capitalist society not a classless one so I will proceed to answer it like that. I don't think your hypothesis that an illegal drugs trade would exist parallel to a legal drugs market holds any water. The prohibition of alcohol and the subsequent legalisation of said drug in America did not show this. Whilst Alcohol has brought its own issues altogether, it is a dangerous drug. I don't think alcohol use should be prohibited because of this though. Everyone in California who uses marijuana would want a medical card. I don't see this being a problem because history proves this to be wrong.

I detest your notion of a drug dealer being the ultimate capitalist. Firstly there are scales. Sure Tony Montana, or his real life incarnation, is an ultimate capitalist like any other person who controls resources and extracts surplus value. But certainly a lot of people do this as a result of their deprived socioeconomic conditions and it is disgusting to punish someone like that or advocate it. I understand someone who says they don't like the idea of taking drugs but I can't understand why you don't see why people take them, because people will always take drugs, and not want to allow this to be done in an environment with better understanding about use (and how much to take) and the effects.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Marijuana is evil. One puff and bang: communism. If it's legalized we'll see the youth of $nation turn into hordes of crazed godless Reds.

Actually in all seriousness... I believe it has saved my life.

You're right. That's the same propaganda that America used to justify the continued prohibition. Nixon said it himself when even his leading advisor on the subject pointed towards legalisation. Its ridiculous how some people haven't seen the political-imperialist war that has been justified under the name: THE WAR ON DRUGS.

[Quail]

This will be decided by the workers council in collobration with medical group that studied drugs.
You're going to have to draw some arbitrary line somewhere. What if a drug falls only just above or below that line? I think it's also difficult to make a concrete decision as to whether a substance is "dangerous" or not because it varies on a case-by-case basis. One person might use heroin once just for the experience and be fine, another might end up in the gutter as a junkie. The same can be said for any drug, or, to an extent, anything that feels good.

I was speaking in transitional society and not under capitalism, sorry for not making it clear.
If people want something, there will always be a "market" for it. What's to stop people from trading for stolen morphine?

This is mostly because of alienation of current society. Basically, I think we need to seperate the issue of personal use and production use. I basically allow personal use because it is personal.

Beside hard drugs decision will change overtime. Meth doesn't have any medical use.
As long as drugs are illegal and frowned upon, there will be a stigma associated with addiction, regardless of the society. Eliminating the alienating conditions that often lead to people ending up addicted to drugs would be the best way to cut drug abuse, not making it illegal. High levels of drug abuse is a symptom of the shitty system we live in. If we lived in a better system, there would be much less need to turn to drugs in a destructive way.

[gorillafuck]

My opinion is simple: Currently illegal drugs should remain illegal, and we should add certain alcoholic drinks to that list as well. Those caught in the act of using drugs however should face little or no consequences, while those selling them should be cracked down on, hard. I'm an advocate of capital punishment for drug dealers, no three strikes, no warnings, no second chances, nothing, there was a point in my life when I believed that a drug dealer caught red handed shouldn't even get a trial, I still don't think they deserve one, but that they should have one anyway just because carrying out punishments without a trial is, well, illegal under international law.
That's so stupid and so irrational that it's unbelievable.


The drug dealer is the lowest of the low, the ultimate capitalist.Except that drugs dealers aren't even bourgeois, unless they like own a plantation where people make coke or facilitate a big meth lab. They're doing terrible things but calling them "the ultimate capitalists" doesn't make sense at all.

[F9]

My opinion is simple: Currently illegal drugs should remain illegal, and we should add certain alcoholic drinks to that list as well. Those caught in the act of using drugs however should face little or no consequences, while those selling them should be cracked down on, hard. I'm an advocate of capital punishment for drug dealers, no three strikes, no warnings, no second chances, nothing, there was a point in my life when I believed that a drug dealer caught red handed shouldn't even get a trial, I still don't think they deserve one, but that they should have one anyway just because carrying out punishments without a trial is, well, illegal under international law. The drug dealer is the lowest of the low, the ultimate capitalist.

I've thought long and hard about the legalisation/regulation route, and while it makes sense from the standpoint that it would eliminate the illegal drug trade, I don't believe this to be the case. If there is a black market for DVDs, jewellery, and "Nike" trainers, there will be a black market for drugs too whether it is legal or illegal, people will always want their fix cheaper, they will want it stronger, without state imposed regulations. Just as there is a massive illegal weapons trade in the US (a country where it is perfectly legal to own and operate a plethora of firearms) there will be an illegal drug trade in any country where drugs are legalised.

Thankfully I'm 99% certain that I'll be long dead before we see a Britain where all drugs are legalised as some people advocate. I don't want to live in that world. Frankly drugs are a big issue for me, I am in support of a war on drugs, just not the current one.

The only thing that actually makes sense is when i associate what you posted here with your nickname/ideology.What the fuck? Thats why i am avoiding describing myself as a communist even though i find myself lots of times been closer to that than Anarchist.Thankfully or not at those moments someone like you, a self claimed communist comes on with a stupid post/idea/comment/article to "wake me up".

[L.A.P.]

My opinion is simple: Currently illegal drugs should remain illegal, and we should add certain alcoholic drinks to that list as well. Those caught in the act of using drugs however should face little or no consequences, while those selling them should be cracked down on, hard. I'm an advocate of capital punishment for drug dealers, no three strikes, no warnings, no second chances, nothing, there was a point in my life when I believed that a drug dealer caught red handed shouldn't even get a trial, I still don't think they deserve one, but that they should have one anyway just because carrying out punishments without a trial is, well, illegal under international law. The drug dealer is the lowest of the low, the ultimate capitalist.

I've thought long and hard about the legalisation/regulation route, and while it makes sense from the standpoint that it would eliminate the illegal drug trade, I don't believe this to be the case. If there is a black market for DVDs, jewellery, and "Nike" trainers, there will be a black market for drugs too whether it is legal or illegal, people will always want their fix cheaper, they will want it stronger, without state imposed regulations. Just as there is a massive illegal weapons trade in the US (a country where it is perfectly legal to own and operate a plethora of firearms) there will be an illegal drug trade in any country where drugs are legalised.

Thankfully I'm 99% certain that I'll be long dead before we see a Britain where all drugs are legalised as some people advocate. I don't want to live in that world. Frankly drugs are a big issue for me, I am in support of a war on drugs, just not the current one.

I don't believe any witty internet image could ever describe how big of a facepalm this is.

[Magón]

I don't believe any witty internet image could ever describe how big of a facepalm this is.

Maybe this?

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_CqtZ6YfaifQ/SsEbXAF-dVI/AAAAAAAAClA/sDiQ7kldbnY/facepalm_implied.jpg

[Bardo]

That's very blatantly not true. Weed is legal in certain places.


That isnt true either, as weed isnt legalised anywhere. Its only decriminalized in certain places.

I fully support the legalization of marijuana and all other drugs. There was a recent study which concluded that alcohol is more destructive to society than even heroin or cocaine. It would be asinine to argue that the drugs themselves pose a greater risk to society than the war on drugs.

[L.A.P.]

Maybe this?

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_CqtZ6YfaifQ/SsEbXAF-dVI/AAAAAAAAClA/sDiQ7kldbnY/facepalm_implied.jpg

It's definitely not enough.

[Technocrat]

All drugs should be legalized. The state has no business regulating this behavior, and attempts to regulate this behavior are ineffective and far too costly anyway - society could bankrupt itself trying to regulate drug use.

To prevent drug abuse from getting out of control, you simply follow the rules of communism: everyone contributes an equal amount of work, everyone receives an equal share of resources from society. If someone was so strung out on drugs that they weren't able to perform their job, then they would lose their right to consume whatever they wanted, and would lose access to their drug supply. So the problem would fix itself.

[Ele'ill]

Imagine all those people in the US going free and literally getting their lives back.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Drug consumption will decrease through the legalization of all drugs. This has already been proven through Portugal, with their drastic drug consumption decrease. Even Harvard Professors are speaking out on this issue:

http://www.businessinsider.com/all-drugs-should-be-legalized-immediately-says-harvard-prof-2010-10

[Ele'ill]

How would drug legalization work in light of drug dealers and cartels- (no, I'm not using THAT argrument don't skip over this post) there would need to be quite a structure set up ahead of time- drugs pretty much packaged and ready to go with suppliers all over standing by. (Currently) It would give way to tons of jobs- 'retail', warehouse, delivery, supplier, etc

If not it's going to be really really bad everywhere as dealers, gangs and the like struggle to gain positions at the top.

Legalizing trom to pull out of the economic shit hole.

[Princess Luna]

My opinion is simple: Currently illegal drugs should remain illegal, and we should add certain alcoholic drinks to that list as well. Those caught in the act of using drugs however should face little or no consequences, while those selling them should be cracked down on, hard. I'm an advocate of capital punishment for drug dealers, no three strikes, no warnings, no second chances, nothing, there was a point in my life when I believed that a drug dealer caught red handed shouldn't even get a trial, I still don't think they deserve one, but that they should have one anyway just because carrying out punishments without a trial is, well, illegal under international law. The drug dealer is the lowest of the low, the ultimate capitalist.

I've thought long and hard about the legalisation/regulation route, and while it makes sense from the standpoint that it would eliminate the illegal drug trade, I don't believe this to be the case. If there is a black market for DVDs, jewellery, and "Nike" trainers, there will be a black market for drugs too whether it is legal or illegal, people will always want their fix cheaper, they will want it stronger, without state imposed regulations. Just as there is a massive illegal weapons trade in the US (a country where it is perfectly legal to own and operate a plethora of firearms) there will be an illegal drug trade in any country where drugs are legalised.

Thankfully I'm 99% certain that I'll be long dead before we see a Britain where all drugs are legalised as some people advocate. I don't want to live in that world. Frankly drugs are a big issue for me, I am in support of a war on drugs, just not the current one.
I'm an advocate of capital punishment for idiots like you, no three strikes, no warnings, no second chances, nothing, there was a point in my life when I believed that someone like you caught red handed shouldn't even get a trial, I still don't think you deserve one, but that they should have one anyway just because carrying out punishments without a trial is, well, illegal under international law. You are the lowest of the low, the ultimate reactionary asshole.

[NGNM85]

How would drug legalization work in light of drug dealers and cartels- (no, I'm not using THAT argrument don't skip over this post) there would need to be quite a structure set up ahead of time- drugs pretty much packaged and ready to go with suppliers all over standing by. (Currently) It would give way to tons of jobs- 'retail', warehouse, delivery, supplier, etc

If not it's going to be really really bad everywhere as dealers, gangs and the like struggle to gain positions at the top.

Legalizing trom to pull out of the economic shit hole.

Legalizing drugs would be the biggest blow ever struck against organized crime. It's kind of interesting that both the law emforcement agencies and the cartels are in lockstep in being dead-set against this. No, some venture capitalists would throw in some cash and completely wipe them out. They could deliver a better product, for a lower price, at a store near you.

[Ele'ill]

I'm an advocate of capital punishment for idiots like you, no three strikes, no warnings, no second chances, nothing, there was a point in my life when I believed that someone like you caught red handed shouldn't even get a trial, I still don't think you deserve one, but that they should have one anyway just because carrying out punishments without a trial is, well, illegal under international law. You are the lowest of the low, the ultimate reactionary asshole.


The only thing that actually makes sense is when i associate what you posted here with your nickname/ideology.What the fuck? Thats why i am avoiding describing myself as a communist even though i find myself lots of times been closer to that than Anarchist.Thankfully or not at those moments someone like you, a self claimed communist comes on with a stupid post/idea/comment/article to "wake me up".

Why?



My point being- flaming is reactionary in that it character assassinates without proving a point. Let's articulate, folks.

[Ele'ill]

Legalizing drugs would be the biggest blow ever struck against organized crime. It's kind of interesting that both the law emforcement agencies and the cartels are in lockstep in being dead-set against this. No, some venture capitalists would throw in some cash and completely wipe them out. They could deliver a better product, for a lower price, at a store near you.

I understand this but the time table isn't competent.

[Princess Luna]

Why?



My point being- flaming is reactionary in that it character assassinates without proving a point.
i don't really support killing him , i was just using his own post against him. Anybody who supports killing a human being mearly for the crime of selling drugs is a reactionary pile of shit and deserves to be flamed.

[Ele'ill]

i don't really support killing him , i was just using his own post against him. Anybody who supports killing a human being mearly for the crime of selling drugs is a reactionary pile of shit and deserves to be flamed.

I don't disagree with the stance against his position but out of the three posts I've seen his was the most clever and I see that as a problem.

[sologdin]

as a matter of principle, it's likely the schedules for narcotics should be abolished, along with criminal penalties for possession & distribution of same.

the question remains, however, what type of regulation should be imposed.

a rational approach, also, is to consider the social cost to be borne by increased consumption when lawful v. the cost for interdiction, enforcement, & incarceration when unlawful.

i suspect that public health cost and lost work time will increase with the increase of lawful suppy. will it rival the costs currently borne? i have no idea.

a second set of considerations, different than the domestic concern regarding cost, is the geopolitical analysis of the narcotics market. local economies in "legitimate" goods and services have been systematically destroyed by neoliberalism, war, US humanitarian aid, and so on--rendering some regions currently fit only for the peasant production of narcotics for the first world market, particularly the US market. this has the side effect, favorable to US imperialism, of dollarizing those local economies, making them therefore dependent to some extent on the strength of the US economy, and pulling them into michael hudson's web of provisioning the US market with goods for potentially worthless promises to pay in the form of fiat currrency. it has the primary effect, moreover, of providing remunerative work to the peasants aforesaid, even if such work is heavily exploitative and degrading, along with being unlawful and subject to interdiction by narcowarriors.

decriminalization will, on the one hand, throw these peasants out of work when multinational pharmaceutical corporations roll out branded narcotics products and capture the US market. it will also, on the other hand, remove the principal means of dollarization of these areas, at least those that lack US military bases--which may be a virtue.

it is of course possible if narcotics production is outsourced to these same growing regions under WTO auspices, which would render the two points above invalid to a certain extent. perhaps such result would be beneficial to the extent that it incorporates such agricultural workers into the lawful global economy, potentially proletarianizing them.

[Political_Chucky]

but that they should have one anyway just because carrying out punishments without a trial is, well, illegal under international law. You are the lowest of the low, the ultimate reactionary asshole.

Hasn't stopped most countries, so go ahead. I give you permission :P

[The Militant]

Marijuana and some other drugs should be legal. One should be able to develop his or herself in their own way.

[southernmissfan]

I understand this but the time table isn't competent.

If I understand you correctly, your concern over legalization is that already existing criminal elements will come to dominate the newly legal drug market by virtue of having a head start?

If so, that's actually a very legitimate concern with the actual implementation of legalization. To be honest, I'm not exactly sure of an answer. I would imagine that in order for the criminal elements to take control of the legal market, they would have to convert there existing operations, supply and money into a legal, corporate structure. And then continue with production, distribution and general operation in accordance with established quality standards and all other business and labor regulations. Thus it would be possible that gangs and organized crime could convert their activities over into the new legal market and come to dominate based on a head start. But if forced to convert to a legal structure to compete, then wouldn't that diminish much of the cause of your concern? It might not be ideal that the gang leaders and mobsters would become the new ceo's and such, but at least they would be subject to oversight and regulation. And market competition would no longer be marked by extreme violence, as it is under prohibition. And even if many dealers and criminal elements became a part of the new legal trade, wouldn't you rather them work legally as a truck drive or in a production center than out on the streets robbing, killing, etc.? I suppose you could argue that the legal drug business could then be a front or source of funds for their other, illegal activities. I don't know though. Dealing drugs is the main business for organized crime. Once that is taken off the black market and into the legal market, I imagine much of organized crime would fall apart and there would be a substantial decrease in gangs, mafias, etc. After all, we would be instantly eliminating their main source of business, thus their main source of money, thus the main source of violence.

Sorry for rambling and I hope this made sense. It's early in the morning and I have yet to fall asleep :/

[Summerspeaker]

Drug laws stand as manifestly unjust and harmful. Remove them immediately. Addicts and abusers need treatment not incarceration. Drug lords and company get resisted as any other bosses.

[Proukunin]

yes, It shouldve never been made illegal.

I also think psilocybin mushrooms should be legal too.

MAPS, multidisciplinary association for psychedelic studies, did tests with mushrooms and found that it relieves cluster headaches and can cure alcoholism. It also has no potential for addiction. and is litterally impossible to overdose from unless you eat as much as you weigh.

[Political_Chucky]

Also, just everyone who wants "drugs" illegalized, isn't it ironic that the U.S.A. now controls 90% of the worlds heroin in Afghanistan?

HNqIrDKnNE8

[Nolan]

I think we can say that prohibition of weed or any drug for that matter doesn't help anything and causes more problems.

I think Portugal has the right idea.

[The Red Next Door]

We should legalize weed, but i have to say WHAT THE FUCK to legalizing crack. I have seen my own mom on that shit, and it was extremely disturbing how she behave, after smoking a little of it.

I think that we should cap drug dealers that sell crack and shit that have my mom beating her self with a fucking pan and trying to kill herself.

again, if you have to be in those situations, you wouldn't even be saying and i don't think any of you give damn to me or anybody else happen to see my mom, fuck up on that shit.

I live in suburbs, that is nice but every once in a while and up the street, where my friend lives, we have people shooting people and i have a gun pull on me and my friend and i almost got a bullet in the head by people looking for money to buy crack. Plus my father life been fuck up by hard drugs and now he is a fucking religious zealot, if he had a weak mind to use drug, he now have a weak mind to rely on something that just as bad as herion.

[Political_Chucky]

We should legalize weed, but i have to say WHAT THE FUCK to legalizing crack. I have seen my own mom on that shit, and it was extremely disturbing how she behave, after smoking a little of it.

I think that we should cap drug dealers that sell crack and shit that have my mom beating her self with a fucking pan and trying to kill herself.

again, if you have to be in those situations, you wouldn't even be saying and i don't think any of you give damn to having to see my mom, fuck up on that shit.

I live in suburbs, that is nice but every once in a while and up the street, where my friend lives, we have people shooting people and i have a gun pull on me and my friend and i almost got a bullet in the head by people looking for money to buy crack. Plus my father life been fuck up by hard drugs and now he is a fucking religious zealot.

I didn't believe it before, but I do think most Marxist-Leninists are idiots.

I'm sorry about your mother and crack-cocaine is definitely not a "good" drug. I am sympathetic to your situation. But that doesn't mean all rationality goes out the window because your mom wants to go crazy and kill herself. You have to understand current situations now, whats wrong with how the system operates, and what we can do to stop it.

[The Red Next Door]

I didn't believe it before, but I do think most Marxist-Leninists are idiots.

I'm sorry about your mother and crack-cocaine is definitely not a "good" drug. I am sympathetic to your situation. But that doesn't mean all rationality goes out the window because your mom wants to go crazy and kill herself. You have to understand current situations now, whats wrong with how the system operates, and what we can do to stop it.

The feeling is mutual, my mom have a mental issue. When she drink depending on which type of drink, she drinks; she do stuff that she would usually never do, like do drugs and that combination of liquire and crack and weed actually made her go fucking nuts.

I do not see nothing irrational about blowing the brains out of those gold chain gangsta wanna be's from my friend neighborhood or the one in the back of me.

all they do is give us problems.

[Proukunin]

i actually think all drugs can be legal and be used for a purpose if they were used safely, but crack is just chemical change to cocain, which is in turn a chemical change to coca leaves.
coca leaves shouldnt be illegal though. at all.

[southernmissfan]

The feeling is mutual, my mom have a mental issue. When she drink depending on which type of drink, she drinks; she do stuff that she would usually never do, like do drugs and that combination of liquire and crack and weed actually made her go fucking nuts.

I do not see nothing irrational about blowing the brains out of those gold chain gangsta wanna be's from my friend neighborhood or the one in the back of me.

all they do is give us problems.


So tell me, how will prohibition help your mom and people like her? How will "blowing the brains out" of drug dealers solve your mom's problems? Do you think satisfying your personal, macho desire for revenge will be constructive in any way? Or is this just ignorant, reactionary bravado? Also, nice "gold chain gangsta wanna be" characterization. This filth you are spewing would make most Republicans blush. What are you really getting at? I won't say what it looks like to me, but I imagine others here are picking up on what I'm hinting at. The fact the you plainly state that you don't see it as irrational is perhaps the icing on the cake.

It's taking all of my will power to try to maintain a somewhat reasonable discourse here. Let me remind you: prohibition creates the gangs. Prohibition creates the violence. There are violent, criminal elements because drugs are black market products. Clearly making drugs illegal does not erase the demand. Therefore cartels, gangs and other elements step in to fulfill the demand. Prohibition does not reduce harm, it only fuels it. And while I agree that many drug dealers (especially gangs, cartels, etc.) are brutal and predatory, there are also many small time dealers (particularly with pot and other less harmful drugs) that are no more "evil" than anyone else participating in the general economy. The war on drugs has been used since its beginning as a tool of attack on the working class, particularly those of color. It has never been equally enforced and has always down on workers and lumpen elements. Not only is there the fundamental philosophic question of determining what one can or cannot put in one's own body, this policy has been an ever escalating avenue for expansion of police power and brutality.

Once again, certain posters on RevLeft show their true colors and expose themselves for what they are: reactionaries with a macho fetish for violence. You are certainly not a revolutionary leftist or a supporter (or even sympathizer!) of the working class. I think your posts in this thread should warrant a restriction. And if the idiotic content of your posts do not warrant a restriction, the fact that you clearly ignored all previous posts, barging in here to post incoherent, inflammatory trolling should at least merit a warning.

[The Red Next Door]

So tell me, how will prohibition help your mom and people like her? How will "blowing the brains out" of drug dealers solve your mom's problems? Do you think satisfying your personal, macho desire for revenge will be constructive in any way? Or is this just ignorant, reactionary bravado? Also, nice "gold chain gangsta wanna be" characterization. This filth you are spewing would make most Republicans blush. What are you really getting at? I won't say what it looks like to me, but I imagine others here are picking up on what I'm hinting at. The fact the you plainly state that you don't see it as irrational is perhaps the icing on the cake.

It's taking all of my will power to try to maintain a somewhat reasonable discourse here. Let me remind you: prohibition creates the gangs. Prohibition creates the violence. There are violent, criminal elements because drugs are black market products. Clearly making drugs illegal does not erase the demand. Therefore cartels, gangs and other elements step in to fulfill the demand. Prohibition does not reduce harm, it only fuels it. And while I agree that many drug dealers (especially gangs, cartels, etc.) are brutal and predatory, there are also many small time dealers (particularly with pot and other less harmful drugs) that are no more "evil" than anyone else participating in the general economy. The war on drugs has been used since its beginning as a tool of attack on the working class, particularly those of color. It has never been equally enforced and has always down on workers and lumpen elements. Not only is there the fundamental philosophic question of determining what one can or cannot put in one's own body, this policy has been an ever escalating avenue for expansion of police power and brutality.

Once again, certain posters on RevLeft show their true colors and expose themselves for what they are: reactionaries with a macho fetish for violence. You are certainly not a revolutionary leftist or a supporter (or even sympathizer!) of the working class. I think your posts in this thread should warrant a restriction. And if the idiotic content of your posts do not warrant a restriction, the fact that you clearly ignored all previous posts, barging in here to post incoherent, inflammatory trolling should at least merit a warning.

My mom is not a drug user, she does stuff that she would not do. when she is drunk.

[The Vegan Marxist]

My mom is not a drug user, she does stuff that she would not do. when she is drunk.

So do you think banning alcohol will help reduce this addiction of hers? From what I've seen, prohibition only helps fuel addiction and consumption.

[southernmissfan]

My mom is not a drug user, she does stuff that she would not do. when she is drunk.

I'm pretty sure virtually everyone else on planet Earth who has gotten drunk has done things they would not normally do. What does this have to do with any of the nonsense you have spouted off or my points in response?

So your mom does dangerous, out of character things when she is drunk and this justifies prohibition of drugs and the execution of drug dealers? Drug dealers who just happen to fit the racial stereotype of the "black thug"?

Are you going to post something of value or continue irrelevant trolling?

[Political_Chucky]

My previous post addressing Red next door wasn't what I wanted to really write( I wanted to go more into why his reasoning is illogical), but then I start trying to figure out where all this crap stems from.

Like I said before I am sympathetic to your mom and your situation then( I haven't personally felt drug abuse from my parents, luckily they refrain from everything, but I have seen what my friends have went through and its quite terrible). But you have to understand how prohibition is used against us, not helping us.

Instead of getting to the effects to prohibition, I'm going to explain how this is not a war on drugs, its a war on who controls drugs.
I'm going to ask you this.

Why do you think we have marines in afgahnistan(as of may 2010, probably longer) patrolling, guarding and cultivating poppy fields?

http://publicintelligence.net/usnato-troops-patrolling-opium-poppy-fields-in-afghanistan/

Who are the main funders for the organization for the drug free america?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partnership_for_a_Drug-Free_America
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/pdfa1.htm


From 1988-91
Pharmaceutical Firms
J. Seward Johnson, Sr. Charitable Trusts --- $1.1 million
Du Pont --- 125,000
Proctor and Gamble Fund --- 120,000
Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation --- 115,000
Johnson & Johnson --- 100,000
Merck Foundation --- 85,000
Hoffman-LaRoche --- 75,000
Tobacco and Liquor Firms
Phillip Morris --- 125,000
Anheuser-Busch --- 100,000
RJ Reynolds --- 100,000
American Brands --- 100,000




PDFA was the subject of criticism when it was revealed by Cynthia Cotts (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Cynthia_Cotts) of the Village Voice (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Village_Voice) that their federal tax returns showed that they had received several million dollars worth of funding from major pharmaceutical (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Pharmaceutical_company), tobacco (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Tobacco_industry) and alcohol (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Brewery) corporations including American Brands (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/American_Brands) (Jim Beam (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Jim_Beam) whiskey), Philip Morris (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Philip_Morris_USA) (Marlboro (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Marlboro_(cigarette)) and Virginia Slims (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Virginia_Slims) cigarettes, Miller beer (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Miller_beer)), Anheuser Busch (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Anheuser_Busch) (Budweiser (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Budweiser), Michelob (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Michelob), Busch beer (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Busch_beer)), R.J. Reynolds (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/R._J._Reynolds_Tobacco_Company) (Camel (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Camel_(cigarette)), Salem (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Salem_(cigarette)), Winston (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Winston_(cigarette)) cigarettes), as well as pharmaceutical firms Bristol Meyers-Squibb (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Bristol_Meyers-Squibb), Merck & Company (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Merck_%26_Company) and Procter & Gamble (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Procter_%26_Gamble). From 1997 it has discontinued any direct fiscal association with tobacco and alcohol suppliers, although it still receives donations from pharmaceutical companies[1] (http://www.revleft.com/vb/#cite_note-0).


Why is medical marijuana a schedule 1 drug when it has been proven to have medical value?
http://www.justice.gov/dea/pubs/scheduling.html



Marijuana 7360 N Cannabis, marijuana

Why is it that this drug war has fueled more and more violence every year?
http://latindispatch.com/2011/01/13/2010-brings-record-violence-in-mexicos-drug-war/



The year 2010 brought the most drug-related deaths (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ba4dcada-1eac-11e0-a1d1-00144feab49a.html#axzz1At1wDX1e) in Mexico since President Felipe Calderón launched his offensive against the country’s cartels in 2006




Drug-related violence in Mexico claimed 15,273 lives during 2010, in the bloodiest year so far in the government’s war against organised crime (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8d0f5ec6-b1fb-11df-b2d9-00144feabdc0.html), official sources reported on Wednesday.





Two weeks ago, a government report that legislators leaked spoke of 22,700 deaths over little more than a three-year period, a far higher body count than the 18,000 or so given by El Universal, a leading newspaper.





Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/04/29/93136/as-drug-war-death-toll-rises-mexicans.html#ixzz1CqkAXzrG





This is the reality of prohibition. It brings more violence, ignorance, and poverty. I don't believe that Red Next Door should be restricted as sothernmissfan has suggested, but I do believe that he needs to be more educated on the situation rather then using emotional reasoning so he can clearly understand the situation that not just affects him, but millions upon millions.

[Political_Chucky]

also watch this documentary
AgMvy9Adwbc

[ExUnoDisceOmnes]

I understand that there are differing opinions on the affects of marijuana and other drugs. However, we need to recognize that there is no correlation between drug laws and drug usage. Legalizing can only make things safer and allow it to be taxed. Same affect as prohibition, blah blah blah

[L.A.P.]

I didn't believe it before, but I do think most Marxist-Leninists are idiots.

Let's also not throw out all rationality over sectarianism.


I do not see nothing irrational about blowing the brains out of those gold chain gangsta wanna be's from my friend neighborhood or the one in the back of me.

You seriously need to chill the fuck out because you're starting to become a real asshole.

[Amphictyonis]

Abolish capitalism and legalize all drugs. One reason so many people abuse drugs and alcohol is to cope with their miserable existence under the division of labor/capitalism. Humans werent meant to repeat the same mundane task over and over.

This guy was a bastard:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Winslow_Taylor

I would think in an advanced communist society drug abuse and depression wouldn't be as rampant as it currently is in the USA. People would probably have closer ties to the community as well in lieu of the 9 to 5 routine wake up, work, home TV eat sleep wake up home TV eat sleep life.

Wa4_ihxT9rI

[Pretty Flaco]

I'm not sure about legalization, but I think there should be better rehab programs for drug users and rehab should become more widely available. Plus there needs to be more direct education on drugs in the areas it affects the most.
People need to know the consequences of excessive drug use. I know a lot of people that smoke and don't realize what it can do to their body.

[The Red Next Door]

I'm pretty sure virtually everyone else on planet Earth who has gotten drunk has done things they would not normally do. What does this have to do with any of the nonsense you have spouted off or my points in response?

So your mom does dangerous, out of character things when she is drunk and this justifies prohibition of drugs and the execution of drug dealers? Drug dealers who just happen to fit the racial stereotype of the "black thug"?

Are you going to post something of value or continue irrelevant trolling?

Did i say weed dealers, I am mostly refering to the pablo escobar of the world, and you sure are becoming insensative, like i said neither of you understand the shit i have to deal with or care.

[The Red Next Door]

So do you think banning alcohol will help reduce this addiction of hers? From what I've seen, prohibition only helps fuel addiction and consumption.

i am not saying ban alcohol.

[Political_Chucky]

Did i say weed dealers, I am mostly refering to the pablo escobar of the world, and you sure are becoming insensative, like i said neither of you understand the shit i have to deal with or care.

I think that's a bit insensitive for you to say... you weren't referring to the Pablo Escobar in the world, you were referring to the everyday drug dealer in society. And yeah, they are fucked up(drug dealers), but do you understand why they are like that? Did you even read my post?

But whatever dude, you think how ever you wanna think. I still believe southernmissfan took your words just a bit out of context, but I see where she/he was going with it and I tried to infer some logic in the situation that lead me to believe maybe you didn't really feel a certain way, or you might not have known enough on the situation.. But obviously I was wrong.
To think I'm stickin my neck out for the kid and he's justa punk hahaha.

[The Red Next Door]

I think that's a bit insensitive for you to say... you weren't referring to the Pablo Escobar in the world, you were referring to the everyday drug dealer in society. And yeah, they are fucked up(drug dealers), but do you understand why they are like that? Did you even read my post?

But whatever dude, you think how ever you wanna think. I still believe southernmissfan took your words just a bit out of context, but I see where she/he was going with it and I tried to infer some logic in the situation that lead me to believe maybe you didn't really feel a certain way, or you might not have known enough on the situation.. But obviously I was wrong.
To think I'm stickin my neck out for the kid and he's justa punk hahaha.

I am not a punk, but whatever. it is your opinion, you really don't know me and i really don't know you either.

[Political_Chucky]

Well you seem to be since your not discussing anything relevant, ignoring points made by everyone on your attempt to label drug dealers as "gangster thugs" which is border line implying racial stereo-types. Why don't you address some of the points here rather then stating the obvious that we are strangers.

[Political_Chucky]

iNhJMB6ds2Y

Also, if you want to know what prohibition does, you can take a look at this. Its not exactly the same, but it shows what prohibition does and how a black market affects society.

[Koba1917]

I find it rather funny how many people are in jail for possession alone. Our prisons are full of non violent people. I find legalization would be helping our economy in different ways.

[PhoenixAsh]

Well...

Two parts to this post....the first part will go into OP.

I am for legalising weed. fact of the matter as shown in Holland...there is no real problem with using weed as long as it is regulated, inspected (THC levels are going up and up...and are getting at a level which is very much to be considered hard drug imo). Legalising it would mean help, education and sensible use would be possible and it would also take the dealing out of the criminal circuit lessening the chances of hard drugs involvement.

Furthermore hard drugs use should be legalised and legal drug handing out by institutions which have the aim to help addicts get a fix so as to lessen crime rates associated with the urge to buy more drugs will go down. It will also help give medical aid to users and provide government programs for addicts who want to beat the habit.


Hard drugs selling however should NEVER be legalised...and that brings me to the next point



Second part of the post

I can not believe anybody actually trying to rationalise drugdealers. Yes they are part of a repressive system which in fact brings about criminal behaviour. But the fact of the matter is that these bastards...prey on the weak and try to push their perverted wares on them ushering them into more slavery.

They actually USE the situation created by the system to make life for working and poor people that much harder and actively USE that situation to further their own selfish needs....and actively work to CONTINUE and perpetuate that system.

I would like to point out to Marx and Trotsky definition of lumpenproletariat and especially the role he designates on drug dealers.

I do NOT care of you are a small time dealer, a recreational dealer, a large coke boss or a kingpin.... dealing that shit is actively trying to corrupt people and feeding of their addiction.

I know people who deal in drugs. How and why they do it I understand. But I am NOT going to defend them....by pointing towards the system. They do have a responsibility of their own...like we all do...the system does NOT make that void,

I have seen those people deal drugs to 16 year old girls and boys. Stating: "If I don't do it someone else will" and "Its their free choice" or "I have got to make a living too you know". In the mean time I have seen boys and girls increased dependability on that shit...getting from a one time curiosity sniff, of push to a full blown addiction within months...with all the nasty stuff that comes out of that including prostitution, self degradation, crime and what not......and all the time the dealer happilly provides.

Whole parts of the city have degraded by that stuff. Bringing nothing but voilence, escapism, crime, and substance slavery.

Well...fuck them!...everybody has got to make a living. Fact is...most of us manage to do so by NOT actively preying on the weakness of others and actually stimulating their dependability on substances that will get them killed.

We all live in a system which creates inequality, which actively stimulates the economic and sociological devision of society. But actively working to be part of that.... There is NO defence. You are 5th colon. You are a class traitor. You sided against the workers and the poor. And people should be allowed to defend themselves against such elements as they should against burglars, rapists and muggers.


IMO they are part of the scum of the earth.

[Red Bayonet]

I know of no more subversive substances than funny green hay, hashish,mescaline,peyote, and LSD. Decriminalize all, and see how quickly subversive thoughts set in.

[Sosa]

1000 times yes. Legalize all drugs.

[Delirium]

For alot of people the options are to either be a wage-slave or to sell drugs. The choice for me would be obvious.

[Public Domain]

Legalize all drugs.

I mean, who will there be to enforce such silly laws?

[Zav]

I think cannabis should be legalized and taxed like alcohol (not that I'm in favor of taxation, but we're already working from within the box). It's not healthy, but it's certainly better than tobacco and liquor. I am against most other drugs, however, for their effects are much more detrimental.

[Mather]

Legalise and regulate all drugs.

[Red_Struggle]

Legalize it and get it over with.

[Scary Monster]

Yeah there shouldnt even be an argument. Legalizing all drugs will take them off the black market. Thus, no need for cartels n shit. Not to mention, weed is fuckin great :)