#00be0f
3
0
1
Feb 24, 2019 19:15:10 GMT
415
themechabaryonyx789
Bowie Dave
4,993
October 2013
themechabaryonyx789
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Baryonyx
Tings
|
Post by themechabaryonyx789 on Apr 1, 2016 22:02:03 GMT
What's the point of an economy and society if people are allowed easy access to means of harming themselves? Legalising harmful drugs is completely pointless, there should be efforts made to create a better more harmonious and functioning society than practically promoting use of harmful things on your body. Suicide is a different matter, as it is usually caused by poor help from the services etc. for people who are depressed. Actually, there is a point. I've brought that up in this post, click here to read it."What's the point of an economy and society if people are allowed easy access to means of harming themselves?" Their body, their rights. This question just shows favoritisim towards the economy and puts it first rather than the right to do what we want to our bodies. The economy isn't as important as the right to do what you want to yourself without being punished for it. "there should be efforts made to create a better more harmonious and functioning society than practically promoting use of harmful things on your body" Making drugs legal has dropped criminal rates before. So it actually counts as one of the steps towards this society you want. I want that too, but so far we have seen different ways of reaching it. Giving people the complete right to damage their bodies isn't giving them freedom or any kind of happiness. The economy/society which people live in is more important than allowing people to destroy themselves using drugs/alcohol. Could you show me an example of when it has dropped criminal rates?
|
|
#00be0f
1
0
1
Sept 19, 2022 0:50:28 GMT
1,130
Theropod
12,650
October 2013
admin
Theropoda Entertainment
Ask through PM
Thero
Genyodectes
Eagle
{"image":"https://66.media.tumblr.com/bec0264f6aea4d9a0137ba0694abea69/tumblr_mmae6u05vY1relrdqo1_1280.jpg","color":"000000"}
460000
ff9900
Example 1
|
Post by Theropod on Apr 1, 2016 23:27:18 GMT
Actually, there is a point. I've brought that up in this post, click here to read it."What's the point of an economy and society if people are allowed easy access to means of harming themselves?" Their body, their rights. This question just shows favoritisim towards the economy and puts it first rather than the right to do what we want to our bodies. The economy isn't as important as the right to do what you want to yourself without being punished for it. "there should be efforts made to create a better more harmonious and functioning society than practically promoting use of harmful things on your body" Making drugs legal has dropped criminal rates before. So it actually counts as one of the steps towards this society you want. I want that too, but so far we have seen different ways of reaching it. Giving people the complete right to damage their bodies isn't giving them freedom or any kind of happiness. The economy/society which people live in is more important than allowing people to destroy themselves using drugs/alcohol. Could you show me an example of when it has dropped criminal rates? How is it not a freedom? Of course it's a freedom, and it's one that doesn't make sense to not have. It's your body, the state should not be telling you what to do with it, period. Now, I'm not saying you're one of those people, but I've seen a lot of people who favour the drug ban, but are clueless as to why some places have laws against suicide. Drugs are not the only thing that can cause harm. Are we gonna make a law against people who slit their wrists? They harm themselves that way, but it's what they want to do, so what are we gonna do? Also, again. If you make drugs legal, the possibility of a drug-related shooting between drug dealers and the police in front of your home drops, it's simple logic. If I banned coffee, there would be people still using coffee. There would be people illegally buying coffee. There would be people being punished legally for consuming or simply buying coffee. It's funny because we are usually fine with our governments having a group of people called the military, designed to kill people who do not agree with their standard of correctness. What is the real point of not allowing a person to damage their body? What makes you believe the state has more authority over an organism than the mind controlling that organism? Also, it's not like making drugs legal means everyone will abuse them. It's the same thing with tobacco, it's legal and still, most people do not use it. Why would it be different with drugs? Also, some drugs, as I already demonstrated before, aren't really all that harmful. Active/Lethal Dose Ratio and Dependence Potential of Psychoactive Drugs. Data source: Gable, R. S. (2006). Acute toxicity of drugs versus regulatory status. In J. M. Fish (Ed.),Drugs and Society: U.S. Public Policy, pp.149-162, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. It isn't the fact that they are harming themselves that makes them happier, but the fact they can use a substance that makes them feel better without worrying about going to jail for it. That's what freedom truly is, doing something without being stopped. Cannabis, psilocybin, lysergic acid diethylamide, all of them can be used responsibly without causing harm to the user or the people around the user. Even cocaine, if used responsibly and not too often, can be as harmful as caffeine. The legalization of drugs does not increase crime rate, but actually makes it lower - and intentional homicide rates in several countries show that, despite Portugal making drugs legal, it's still a safer place to live in than countries where even drugs as unharmful as marijuana are still illegal. In 2012, Portugal had a murder rate of 1.2 per 100,000 population ( Global Study on Homicide. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2013), while the United States, where most drugs are illegal and most states have banned marijuana, has a homicide rate of ~4.5 per 100,000 population ( source), ~3.75 times more than in Portugal. Of course, this does not indicate that drug legalization necessarily drops crime rate, but it shows that making them legal does not make it any higher, either. In fact, Portugal is considered the 11th most peaceful country in the world ( source). The ban on drugs is not working. People are still dying, people are still using drugs, people are still killing to get drugs. But the latter doesn't happen when drugs are legal, because why kill someone to get something you can get easily? Drug-related homicide will always drop with the legalization of drugs. It's that simple. Also, no. The economy will never be as important to me as my right to do what I want to my body. That's like saying money is important, even if you can't use the millions of dollars you have. Again, despite the United States having such a large economy, it is not a better place to live in than Norway or Switzerland, which by the way, even if combined still have an economy several times smaller than the US. The society, yes, that I can agree on. But the economy, not really. My personal rights matter more to me than whether my country is rich or not.
|
|
#00be0f
3
0
1
Feb 24, 2019 19:15:10 GMT
415
themechabaryonyx789
Bowie Dave
4,993
October 2013
themechabaryonyx789
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Baryonyx
Tings
|
Post by themechabaryonyx789 on Apr 2, 2016 16:23:36 GMT
Theropod(Trying to reply using quotes is a nightmare for my device) Firstly, things like suicide can be prevented by more proper involvement from social services which can be caused by better funding from government. It can be prevented in another ways apart from a ban so it is irrelevant to bring it up here. Illegal drugs are not the only things that cause harm, but it is something which can be banned in order to create an overall happier society. What you're saying is almost like saying that because we can't completely stop racism we shouldn't make any steps towards stopping it. We can't completely prevent self-destruction but there is no reason why we can't at least make the problem better by banning harmful substances. Self-harm is not a freedom. It is caused by depression, which is something that can be stopped far more easily with better mental/health service intervention. Using drugs like cocaine does not solve depression or make people happier- it has the capability to destroy lives and is only ever a short-term solution. I highly doubt that people in general will use drugs responsibly if they are given more access to it, seeing as those drugs are incredibly addictive and a lot of people who would use it are reckless. People like you would likely use it responsibly but this does not account at all for the vast majority. I do not necessarily agree with the current drug bans- if governments in general got their heads out of their asses far more efficient drug bans can be created. As I said allowing self-harm from drugs can only damage society and the economy- a person's right to harm themselves using drugs being more important than society/economy is a concept that makes society completely pointless- people are society. 'Legalisation of drugs does not increase crime rate, but actually makes it lower'- (referring to example)- 'this does not indicate that drug legalization necessarily drops crime rate, but it shows that making them legal does not make it any higher, either.' You haven't proved your point here. And also Portugal is only one example- there will be many factors in play which makes it a better society.
|
|
#00be0f
3
0
1
Feb 24, 2019 19:15:10 GMT
415
themechabaryonyx789
Bowie Dave
4,993
October 2013
themechabaryonyx789
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Baryonyx
Tings
|
Post by themechabaryonyx789 on Apr 2, 2016 16:25:30 GMT
(Referring to your image source which I managed to miss in my first reply) Some drugs may not be as harmful- but this doesn't at all eliminate the fact that some are very harmful.
|
|
#00be0f
1
0
1
Sept 19, 2022 0:50:28 GMT
1,130
Theropod
12,650
October 2013
admin
Theropoda Entertainment
Ask through PM
Thero
Genyodectes
Eagle
{"image":"https://66.media.tumblr.com/bec0264f6aea4d9a0137ba0694abea69/tumblr_mmae6u05vY1relrdqo1_1280.jpg","color":"000000"}
460000
ff9900
Example 1
|
Post by Theropod on Apr 2, 2016 17:22:38 GMT
themechabaryonyx789While this sounds reasonable, I have already shown that a society where drugs are not fully illegal works just fine.Yes, but the difference is; Racism: prejudice towards one or more people based on ethnicity Drug use: prejudice to yourself See the difference there? Bringing harm to yourself while knowing it can be stupid, but you are the only person who shall be able to judge.But it isn't making the problem better, it's making it worse.The definition of freedom: "the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint." If I want to harm myself by using drugs, I am not allowed to. This is not a freedom. If I'm allowed to harm myself with drugs, I have the freedom to do so. So yes, it is a freedom. There is no denying this. It doesn't matter what's behind the person seeking that freedom, this does not define freedom.This is basically the assumption that everyone who takes drugs does it to avoid depression, which isn't true at all.The drug itself makes you feel good. That's the same reason why we drink and why we also eat certain things we don't need. Also, seriously, this just means that "if it doesn't do anything good to you, it should be banned". Not quite the way I think. And how about we bring up other drugs that are currently banned but aren't really as harmful, like marijuana?Same with alcohol. Instead of banning drugs, ban irresponsible use. People will still be irresponsible, of course, but it's a better approach - at least we won't have to get responsible users in jail.That's for sure, but apparently no one thought this about alcohol. What makes a person a responsible user? Simply put, knowledge. People who are aware of the advantages and disadvantages of drug use are more likely to use drugs responsibly.I agree with this, imo a full-on ban doesn't work too well. I think we should just allow responsible use, that would be a good approach. It doesn't stop drug abuse, but it prevents responsible people from going to jail.The Portuguese society is just fine. Better than the American society, if you ask me. Their economy is okay as well. They're using the system I've been defending here, a system that doesn't send responsible people to jail. Basically, a full-on drug ban assumes that if you take an X amount of Y drug, you will commit Z crime. This is not a good assumption.So it harms society to give them the option to do what they want with their bodies? However this might work in theory, it isn't being that harmful in reality.Do I need to prove that getting rid of the need for drug dealers to exist makes crime rates lower? With drugs being legal, I'm pretty sure drug dealers won't be shooting cops near you that easily.We are all people. All under the same subspecies. Two separate societies ruled by two separate, yet identical governments will act the same. Portugal is basically proof that a society where drugs aren't fully banned isn't worse than one where they're fully illegal. And in fact, as I've shown, they even have a lower crime rate than the US - this proves that legal drugs do not necessarily mean danger.
|
|
#00be0f
3
0
1
Feb 24, 2019 19:15:10 GMT
415
themechabaryonyx789
Bowie Dave
4,993
October 2013
themechabaryonyx789
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Baryonyx
Tings
|
Post by themechabaryonyx789 on Apr 2, 2016 21:45:51 GMT
This debate probably isn't going to go anywhere as we both have different ideals/moral and logical perspectives when it comes to this particular subject.
|
|
#00be0f
1
0
1
Sept 19, 2022 0:50:28 GMT
1,130
Theropod
12,650
October 2013
admin
Theropoda Entertainment
Ask through PM
Thero
Genyodectes
Eagle
{"image":"https://66.media.tumblr.com/bec0264f6aea4d9a0137ba0694abea69/tumblr_mmae6u05vY1relrdqo1_1280.jpg","color":"000000"}
460000
ff9900
Example 1
|
Post by Theropod on Apr 3, 2016 5:16:27 GMT
Well, that is actually the purpose of the debate, to understand different points of view, but I see what you mean, respect and completely understand that.
|
|
#00be0f
3
0
1
Feb 24, 2019 19:15:10 GMT
415
themechabaryonyx789
Bowie Dave
4,993
October 2013
themechabaryonyx789
TheMechaBaryonyx789
Baryonyx
Tings
|
Post by themechabaryonyx789 on Apr 3, 2016 11:49:42 GMT
Well, that is actually the purpose of the debate, to understand different points of view, but I see what you mean, respect and completely understand that. Same here. We could still debate on the actual facts however
|
|
inherit
288
0
114
superhamdav
Hainosaurus is now congeneric with Tylosaurus. I guess that means that it's Tylosaurus bernardi now.
3,381
January 2016
superhamdav
Macrophyseter Pictures
Discord>Skype, whatever that is.
I heard inhaling it helps your nose congestion and all.
Whatha's dayuinausoar?
Tylosaurinae mosasaurs
http://i.imgur.com/Ai7iPV0.png
003CFF
|
Post by superhamdav on Apr 5, 2016 0:12:17 GMT
well marijuana is now medical
|
|
#00be0f
1
0
1
Sept 19, 2022 0:50:28 GMT
1,130
Theropod
12,650
October 2013
admin
Theropoda Entertainment
Ask through PM
Thero
Genyodectes
Eagle
{"image":"https://66.media.tumblr.com/bec0264f6aea4d9a0137ba0694abea69/tumblr_mmae6u05vY1relrdqo1_1280.jpg","color":"000000"}
460000
ff9900
Example 1
|
Post by Theropod on Apr 5, 2016 4:07:01 GMT
Not everywhere.
|
|
inherit
288
0
114
superhamdav
Hainosaurus is now congeneric with Tylosaurus. I guess that means that it's Tylosaurus bernardi now.
3,381
January 2016
superhamdav
Macrophyseter Pictures
Discord>Skype, whatever that is.
I heard inhaling it helps your nose congestion and all.
Whatha's dayuinausoar?
Tylosaurinae mosasaurs
http://i.imgur.com/Ai7iPV0.png
003CFF
|
Post by superhamdav on Apr 10, 2016 20:37:03 GMT
well first in colorado i think
|
|
#00be0f
1
0
1
Sept 19, 2022 0:50:28 GMT
1,130
Theropod
12,650
October 2013
admin
Theropoda Entertainment
Ask through PM
Thero
Genyodectes
Eagle
{"image":"https://66.media.tumblr.com/bec0264f6aea4d9a0137ba0694abea69/tumblr_mmae6u05vY1relrdqo1_1280.jpg","color":"000000"}
460000
ff9900
Example 1
|
Post by Theropod on Apr 11, 2016 0:23:18 GMT
Still, the thread is more about if drugs should be legal rather than where they are allowed.
|
|