NationStates Jolt Archive

I think its sad that the same people who say drugs should be legal, even though a lot of people die from them, are the same who say guns should be illegal because people die from them. Drugs and alcohol kill ALOT more people each year than guns, yet the pro-legalization of drugs groups are, for the most part, the same ones wanting to ban guns.



SOURCE (http://www.reconsider.org/issues/public_health/estimated_deaths_.htm)


Annual Causes of Deaths in the US

Estimated U.S. deaths in 2000 attributed to:

Tobacco (Average 1990 - 94): ................................. 430,700 (1)
Alcohol (1996): ................................................. 110,640 (2)
Adverse Reactions to Prescription Drugs (1982 / 1998): .. 32,000 (3)
Suicide (1998): .................................................. 30,575 (4)
Homicide (1998): ............................................... 18,272 (5)
All licit and illicit drug-induced deaths (1998): ............. 16,926 (6)
Non-Steroidal Anti- Inflammatory Drugs (1992):............ 7,600 (7)
Marijuana: ...................................................... 0 (8)



While I don't believe ANY deaths can be justified, I don't see how you can attack guns, and support drugs with the same justifications. Having rights means having risks. You can't take some away, and leave others, just because it doesn't interest you. Example: A alcohol user shouldn't want to ban guns because he doesn't like them. And a Pro-guns person shouldn't want to ban beer because he doesn't drink. And someone who wants to ban it all shouldn't live in America, where our rights are constitutional.

By the way, I'm against hard drug legalizations, such as crack, heroine, or meth. But I don't think it should be banned or criminalized. I just don't like it, and I feel thats my right, but my right shouldn't supersede anothers.

Drugs kill you. Guns kill other people.

Either ban guns or legalise drugs. Illegal drugs and legal guns is a recipe for disaster. It leads to unending violence over the sales and purchases of drugs. Of the two, I think the legaisation of drugs would go further toward reducing violence.

Drugs kill you. Guns kill other people.
Tell that to the kid who just lost both his parents to a drunk driver, or the wife who just found out her husband was killed in a robbery, because a crackhead or meth addict needed a fix!

Drugs kill you. Guns kill other people.

Have you never heard of a little thing called suicide?

Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

I support the legalisation of all drugs because during the years when I was a junky and yes, manufacturer of illicit substances, I saw how the massive interdiction we have currently only serves to lead to more deaths and to enrich the criminals.

Legalise drugs and have the gov't manufacture distribute them at fair prices sounds terrible, but is the lesser of two evils. With such a system at least the profits made could be used to help people get off the drugs and the drugs themselves would be much, much safer, due to guarenteed purity. Safe injection sites would also almost entirely eliminate the spread of disease that invariably goes hand in hand with the sharing of needles. Brining the price down significantly would also elimante people commiting crimes such as prostitution and theft in order to support their habits. The criminals would no longer be able to profit from them either. The continued ban of drugs simply encourages and enriches criminal enterprise while marginalising a segment of society depsreately in need of help to combat their addictions.


In short, I want to see drugs legalised because the use of them will always be a problem, and legalisation would greatly reduce the number of deaths and amount of suffering the use of drugs invariably brings.

Either ban guns or legalise drugs. Illegal drugs and legal guns is a recipe for disaster. It leads to unending violence over the sales and purchases of drugs. Of the two, I think the legaisation of drugs would go further toward reducing violence.
Thats close to my way of thinking.

Tell that to the kid who just lost both his parents to a drunk driver, or the wife who just found out her husband was killed in a robbery, because a crackhead or meth addict needed a fix!


Legalise drugs and the crackers and jibheads won't need to steal and kill to support their habits. Operating machinery/ driving under the influence should/would still be illegal and punishable under the fullest extent of the law.

I think its sad that the same people who say drugs should be legal, even though a lot of people die from them, are the same who say guns should be illegal because people die from them. Drugs and alcohol kill ALOT more people each year than guns, yet the pro-legalization of drugs groups are, for the most part, the same ones wanting to ban guns.


While I don't believe ANY deaths can be justified, I don't see how you can attack guns, and support drugs with the same justifications. Having rights means having risks. You can't take some away, and leave others, just because it doesn't interest you. Example: A alcohol user shouldn't want to ban guns because he doesn't like them. And a Pro-guns person shouldn't want to ban beer because he doesn't drink. And someone who wants to ban it all shouldn't live in America, where our rights are constitutional.

By the way, I'm against hard drug legalizations, such as crack, heroine, or meth. But I don't think it should be banned or criminalized. I just don't like it, and I feel thats my right, but my right shouldn't supersede anothers.


I get your point, I have always said they should all be legal under proper conditions, and strict regulation.
But whatever.

I don't care... as long as the human race is dying, one way or another.

Sometimes that's all that matters.

:eek: Drugs kill you. Guns kill other people.

LMAO -- ok on Drugs with Guns?

I support legalization due to success in places like Amsterdam.
You want pot? Go to the coffee house.
You want heroin? Go to the doctor.
You want flowers? Go to the windmills.

No crime, no dirty needles. People can live functional lives benefitting society rather than being part of the underbelly.

I wouldn't want my brain surgeon hung over from the nite before - nor would I want him smoking pot before surgery, nor would I want him carrying a gun.

I also support gun ranges for each neighborhood - no questions asked - then you can shoot the person you're aiming at (j/k sort of).

Starry

You support the extinction of a species because they make you angry/depressed?

I don't care... as long as the human race is dying, one way or another.

Sometimes that's all that matters.

Cheerfulness abounds on this thread, really.

Legalise drugs and the crackers and jibheads won't need to steal and kill to support their habits. Operating machinery/ driving under the influence should/would still be illegal and punishable under the fullest extent of the law.
crackers and jibheads?

Drugs and alcohol kill ALOT more people each year than guns, yet the pro-legalization of drugs groups are, for the most part, the same ones wanting to ban guns.

Where do you get this idea? I find that most people who want to legalise drugs also want to legalise guns. You're just using "liberal left" stereotypes.

Legalize drugs and you'll see burglaries of convenience stores go up 10 fold.

Legalize drugs and you'll see burglaries of convenience stores go up 10 fold.

Why?

Hard drugs are directly linked to violent crime. Legalizing them would be a disaster and an economic drain on the United States.

Legalize marijuana, but draw the line at that.

Why?

Think about where the legalized drugs would be sold-Convenience stores. And because it would be legal (And somewhat cheaper) you could get all you want, and knowing druggies that's what they'd do because it's their LIFE. Nothing else matters to a druggie except that next 'hit'. Kids can starve, the house can fall to peices, yard go unkept but they forsake it all for that next hit.



All that will change is that the paycheck might last a day longer.

Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

No, gaping holes in people kill people.

1) Make pot legal, available, cheap and plentiful, and most people won't get mixed up in garbage like meth and crack and toluene.

2) Make guns illegal. Period.

Where do you get this idea? I find that most people who want to legalise drugs also want to legalise guns. You're just using "liberal left" stereotypes.
I may have overstated the odds SLIGHTLY, but you just can't convince me that Pro guns, and Pro drugs are one and the same! I am in the SMALL minority that believe in both, at least as far as I've seen. And I've been around.

Tell that to the kid who just lost both his parents to a drunk driver, or the wife who just found out her husband was killed in a robbery, because a crackhead or meth addict needed a fix!

You mean by a crackhead with a gun?

Besides, no one is arguing for the prohibition of alcohol, that was clearly a disaster when we tried it. Similar arguments applied to other drugs are equally pointless.

Legalize drugs and you'll see burglaries of convenience stores go up 10 fold.

Yes, but they'll be happy to just steal the drugs. :D

Really though, if they were legalized then the rediculous overhead that the drug trade labors under would be eliminated, so they would be easier to afford. Sure some people might drug themselves to death, but how much more of a drain is an unemployable, criminal, drug addict compared to a suicidal drug addict?

Where do you get this idea? I find that most people who want to legalise drugs also want to legalise guns. You're just using "liberal left" stereotypes.

Legalise guns? Since when were they illegal?

Oh crap, I better go bury mine before the Gubmint finds out...

;)

1) Make pot legal, available, cheap and plentiful, and most people won't get mixed up in garbage like meth and crack and toluene.

2) Make guns illegal. Period.


How? Last time I checked you can't over-write the constitution.

Hard drugs are directly linked to violent crime. Legalizing them would be a disaster and an economic drain on the United States.

Wouldn't it rather be the other way around? If you legalize hard drugs, it will take power away from criminal organisations and bring money to the government, no? And you'll be able to control it so people can still be safe (like, you know, selling/giving/whatever disease-free needles rather than people often having to use dirty and possibly infected ones?)

No, gaping holes in people kill people.

:D So true... and yet... so strange and sarcastic. :D

crackers and jibheads?


Craker= crack head

Jib = Toronto slang for Crystal Meth, so Jibhead = Meth addict

Wouldn't it rather be the other way around? If you legalize hard drugs, it will take power away from criminal organisations and bring money to the government, no? And you'll be able to control it so people can still be safe (like, you know, selling/giving/whatever disease-free needles rather than people often having to use dirty and possibly infected ones?)

If the goverment couldn't control drugs when they were illegal imposing restrictions that people don't want on them (IE charging more to make them safe) they will go back to pre-legal days.

No, gaping holes in people kill people.

I frequently put my whole foot in my mouth, put I'm not dead ;) :p

I may have overstated the odds SLIGHTLY, but you just can't convince me that Pro guns, and Pro drugs are one and the same! I am in the SMALL minority that believe in both, at least as far as I've seen. And I've been around.
What country do you live in? In my country, you're in a minority if you believe in legalising either of them.

Wouldn't it rather be the other way around? If you legalize hard drugs, it will take power away from criminal organisations and bring money to the government, no? And you'll be able to control it so people can still be safe (like, you know, selling/giving/whatever disease-free needles rather than people often having to use dirty and possibly infected ones?)

No, I mean that the drugs themselves lead to violence because they increase aggression and reduce the capacity for logical and consistent thinking. That's why a considerable number of violent crimes are committed under the influence of hard drugs like heroin, PCP, meth, etc.

That's why I support marijuana legalization; it takes the least harmful and most beneficial drug out of the criminals' hands.

Legalise guns? Since when were they illegal?

Oh crap, I better go bury mine before the Gubmint finds out...

;)
I live in Ireland. They're not completely outlawed, but they're heavily restricted, as are drugs.

How? Last time I checked you can't over-write the constitution.
Dobbsworld lives in Canada.

I may have overstated the odds SLIGHTLY, but you just can't convince me that Pro guns, and Pro drugs are one and the same! I am in the SMALL minority that believe in both, at least as far as I've seen. And I've been around.
What country do you live in? In my country, you're in a minority if you believe in legalising either of them. They are obviously not one and the same, but people who want to legalise drugs (I mean, beyond just marajuana, who have thought about it) also have no problem with allowing guns. But guns are a never-discussed issue here.

Simple. Guns are cool.

Drugs are lame.

Guns make explosions.

Drugs don't make explosions.

Nuff said?

Guns don't kill people, death kills people. Guns just bring forth death. Drugs, speed it up. :cool:

I don't believe the fact that drug kill you is the main reason people are against them...it's the fact that they can destroy lives without killing people.

In a way the original post seem to condone making everything legal because somehow to make something illegal would infinge on someons rights...like smoking, to ban someone from smoking is an infringement on their rights, however when they smoke they infringe my right to clean air...so there is a pay off and the pay off from banning smoking is that long term all people benifit...health wise.

Guns don't kill people, death kills people. Guns just bring forth death. Drugs, speed it up. :cool:

Death doesn't kill people, he's just there right after they die

No, I mean that the drugs themselves lead to violence because they increase aggression and reduce the capacity for logical and consistent thinking. That's why a considerable number of violent crimes are committed under the influence of hard drugs like heroin, PCP, meth, etc.

That's why I support marijuana legalization; it takes the least harmful and most beneficial drug out of the criminals' hands.

Under the influence of heroin? Have you ever seen anyone under the influence of heroin? The only crime they're likely to commit is public urination, and that's only because they passed out on the sidewalk and wet themselves.

I'm not saying that heroin doesn't have a connection to crime, it's just that the crime usually precedes the drug use, not vice versa.

I don't believe the fact that drug kill you is the main reason people are against them...it's the fact that they can destroy lives without killing people.

In a way the original post seem to condone making everything legal because somehow to make something illegal would infinge on someons rights...like smoking, to ban someone from smoking is an infringement on their rights, however when they smoke they infringe my right to clean air...so there is a pay off and the pay off from banning smoking is that long term all people benifit...health wise.

But cigarette smoke is only harmful in confined spaces, like a resteraunt, a subway car, or a taxi cab. To ban cigarettes outright, even in one's own home is an absurd infringement on their rights, and has no payoff to the greater public good. The same with marijuana, especially since all the research indicates that marijuana seems to have a cancer-protective effect that cancels out the damage from the toxins that it has in common with cigarettes.

In a way the original post seem to condone making everything legal because somehow to make something illegal would infinge on someons rights...like smoking, to ban someone from smoking is an infringement on their rights, however when they smoke they infringe my right to clean air...so there is a pay off and the pay off from banning smoking is that long term all people benifit...health wise.

There is a similar pay-off from banning automobiles. But we don't do that. Because rights are more important than health. And every time you drive a car, or ride in one, or use a product that was transported by car or plane or ship, you "infringe on my right to clean air." Obviously, no one's going to ban automobiles for infringing on my 'right' to clean air, so I shouldn't be prohibited from smoking a cigarette for that same right. Especially when cars pollute far more than second hand smoke in open spaces. ;)