Bolol
21-12-2005, 19:01
*There are probably those among you who smoke or drink; this is merely a hypothetical situation, please bear with me.*
What's been bugging me for a while now is over 100,000 deaths in a year in the US are attributed to alcohol, 4 times that with tobacco. Roughly half a million people killed by legal (and need I remind, highly profitable) substances.
At at the same time other "harmful substances" like marijuana, heroin and cocaine, kill far less, and yet our government spends billions in order to put away Joe Idiot who got caught with a dime-bag for the next 20 years. Yet, we have far more dangerous substances that are practically sanctioned. I.e. alcohol and tobacco.
This seems to be an excellent example of the fabled "flip-flopping" that Republicans love to label.
Well, I seek a different sollution; a unilateral solution. Either we:
A) Make all "substances" legal. It will boost the economy for sure, but there will be that whole "slowly killing off the population" thing to worry about.
Wont happen because: No one has the balls to repeal the drug laws.
OR
B) Ban 'em all. We won't have any more deaths, but then we'll have the whole "totalitarian" complaint to worry about, as well as having to spend more money to curtail illegal production.
Wont happen because: Lobbyist aren't gonna give up their lucrative businesses.
I guess what I'm trying to say is...When it comes to any "harmful substance"...it is effectively a "lose-lose" situation.
I'd love to hear your ideas though, because I've run out. I've depressed myself...
*goes to eat a cookie*
What's been bugging me for a while now is over 100,000 deaths in a year in the US are attributed to alcohol, 4 times that with tobacco. Roughly half a million people killed by legal (and need I remind, highly profitable) substances.
At at the same time other "harmful substances" like marijuana, heroin and cocaine, kill far less, and yet our government spends billions in order to put away Joe Idiot who got caught with a dime-bag for the next 20 years. Yet, we have far more dangerous substances that are practically sanctioned. I.e. alcohol and tobacco.
This seems to be an excellent example of the fabled "flip-flopping" that Republicans love to label.
Well, I seek a different sollution; a unilateral solution. Either we:
A) Make all "substances" legal. It will boost the economy for sure, but there will be that whole "slowly killing off the population" thing to worry about.
Wont happen because: No one has the balls to repeal the drug laws.
OR
B) Ban 'em all. We won't have any more deaths, but then we'll have the whole "totalitarian" complaint to worry about, as well as having to spend more money to curtail illegal production.
Wont happen because: Lobbyist aren't gonna give up their lucrative businesses.
I guess what I'm trying to say is...When it comes to any "harmful substance"...it is effectively a "lose-lose" situation.
I'd love to hear your ideas though, because I've run out. I've depressed myself...
*goes to eat a cookie*