4 ms·

But it is mostly the money from the monopoly prohibition has granted to that criminal class that perpetuates its existence. If you replace the criminal drug in

by uriel 17y ago

But it is mostly the money from the monopoly prohibition has granted to that criminal class that perpetuates its existence. If you replace the criminal drug industry with a legal drug industry, you will encourage the growth of the non-criminal-classes, people working on the drug industry will become law-abiding-tax-paying citizens that will have an interest in the rule of law, instead of criminals with an interest in undermining it by corrupting law enforcement, criminals, and the whole fabric of society. Here is a great interview with Milton Friedman about the economic and social effects of the War on Drugs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyystXOfDqo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyystXOfDqo

rick888 17y ago
"But it is mostly the money from the monopoly prohibition has granted to that criminal class that perpetuates its existence." It's not prohibition, it's illegal. I love how the pro-drug people use this word when you wouldn't say we have a prohibition on rape, murder, or burglary. "If you replace the criminal drug industry with a legal drug industry, you will encourage the growth of the non-criminal-classes, people working on the drug industry will become law-abiding-tax-paying citizens that will have an interest in the rule of law, instead of criminals with an interest in undermining it by corrupting law enforcement, criminals, and the whole fabric of society." I'm okay with that if you're okay with knowing that we will encourage people to sell substances that will destroy lives through addiction and kill people. The difference is that the legal drug companies are selling drugs that actually have some purpose besides getting you high. I really don't see how a drug like crystal meth will help anyone in the long run.
- armandososa 17y ago
  "you wouldn't say we have a prohibition on rape, murder, or burglary." I think that's because those are crimes against other people. You should be able to kill yourself if you really want to, but they won't allow you. "I really don't see how a drug like crystal meth will help anyone in the long run." Natural selection? If anybody is dumb enough to damage or kill themselves with the use of drugs it's fine with me. Same goes for cigarrettes.
  - rick888 17y ago
    "You should be able to kill yourself if you really want to, but they won't allow you." If I own a business. Will I be allowed to not hire anyone that even touches drugs? I feel I should have the right, since those people have the right to "kill themselves". Also, if we have a government run health care program, regular drug users should either 1) have to pay a large percentage more out of their pockets or 2) shouldn't get covered by a government plan. I shouldn't have to pay for anyone knowingly killing themselves with substances. "Natural selection? If anybody is dumb enough to damage or kill themselves with the use of drugs it's fine with me. Same goes for cigarrettes." You might be fine with this, but there are still people to this day that sue the cigarette companies for health bills and other related problems due to their own problems. We will also be exposing a larger percentage of the population to substances that are known to be addictive. This will result in more addicts, which can and will increase health care costs overall. How do you propose we deal with these problems? You seem to have this idea that when we legalize all drugs, all drug-related violence will stop and we won't have any other problems. It's not as simple or as easy as this.
    - armandososa 17y ago
      "You seem to have this idea that when we legalize all drugs, all drug-related violence will stop and we won't have any other problems. It's not as simple or as easy as this." No. Read my comment above and you'll see that that's not my idea. I'm just saying that dumb people should be allowed to remove themselves from the genetic pool.
- gojomo 17y ago
  It's not prohibition, it's illegal. I love how the pro-drug people use this word when you wouldn't say we have a prohibition on rape, murder, or burglary. The distinction is important: drug prohibition is a choice, and other societies (including our own society at other times) have made different choices here, often to their benefit. There isn't much choice about prohibiting rape, murder, burglary -- to have any social order at all, they must be prohibited. See also the difference between conduct that is malum prohibitum versus that which is malum in se. These legal terms draw a distinction between things that are wrong because a law was chosen (regardless of their harmfulness), versus those things that are inherently wrong/harmful. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_prohibitum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_prohibitum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_in_se http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_in_se Even those who like to ban intoxicants called their period of greatest influence "prohibition", when alcohol was banned. So there are good legal and historical reasons for calling anti-drug-laws "prohibition".

by uriel 17y ago

rick888 17y ago

"But it is mostly the money from the monopoly prohibition has granted to that criminal class that perpetuates its existence." It's not prohibition, it's illegal. I love how the pro-drug people use this word when you wouldn't say we have a prohibition on rape, murder, or burglary. "If you replace the criminal drug industry with a legal drug industry, you will encourage the growth of the non-criminal-classes, people working on the drug industry will become law-abiding-tax-paying citizens that will have an interest in the rule of law, instead of criminals with an interest in undermining it by corrupting law enforcement, criminals, and the whole fabric of society." I'm okay with that if you're okay with knowing that we will encourage people to sell substances that will destroy lives through addiction and kill people. The difference is that the legal drug companies are selling drugs that actually have some purpose besides getting you high. I really don't see how a drug like crystal meth will help anyone in the long run.

armandososa 17y ago
"you wouldn't say we have a prohibition on rape, murder, or burglary." I think that's because those are crimes against other people. You should be able to kill yourself if you really want to, but they won't allow you. "I really don't see how a drug like crystal meth will help anyone in the long run." Natural selection? If anybody is dumb enough to damage or kill themselves with the use of drugs it's fine with me. Same goes for cigarrettes.
- rick888 17y ago
  "You should be able to kill yourself if you really want to, but they won't allow you." If I own a business. Will I be allowed to not hire anyone that even touches drugs? I feel I should have the right, since those people have the right to "kill themselves". Also, if we have a government run health care program, regular drug users should either 1) have to pay a large percentage more out of their pockets or 2) shouldn't get covered by a government plan. I shouldn't have to pay for anyone knowingly killing themselves with substances. "Natural selection? If anybody is dumb enough to damage or kill themselves with the use of drugs it's fine with me. Same goes for cigarrettes." You might be fine with this, but there are still people to this day that sue the cigarette companies for health bills and other related problems due to their own problems. We will also be exposing a larger percentage of the population to substances that are known to be addictive. This will result in more addicts, which can and will increase health care costs overall. How do you propose we deal with these problems? You seem to have this idea that when we legalize all drugs, all drug-related violence will stop and we won't have any other problems. It's not as simple or as easy as this.
  - armandososa 17y ago
    "You seem to have this idea that when we legalize all drugs, all drug-related violence will stop and we won't have any other problems. It's not as simple or as easy as this." No. Read my comment above and you'll see that that's not my idea. I'm just saying that dumb people should be allowed to remove themselves from the genetic pool.
gojomo 17y ago
It's not prohibition, it's illegal. I love how the pro-drug people use this word when you wouldn't say we have a prohibition on rape, murder, or burglary. The distinction is important: drug prohibition is a choice, and other societies (including our own society at other times) have made different choices here, often to their benefit. There isn't much choice about prohibiting rape, murder, burglary -- to have any social order at all, they must be prohibited. See also the difference between conduct that is malum prohibitum versus that which is malum in se. These legal terms draw a distinction between things that are wrong because a law was chosen (regardless of their harmfulness), versus those things that are inherently wrong/harmful. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_prohibitum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_prohibitum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_in_se http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_in_se Even those who like to ban intoxicants called their period of greatest influence "prohibition", when alcohol was banned. So there are good legal and historical reasons for calling anti-drug-laws "prohibition".