6 ms·

Cigarette companies are still being sued to this day for causing cancer in users. There were public, social, campaigns saying that these companies were evil fo

Cigarette companies are still being sued to this day for causing cancer in users. There were public, social, campaigns saying that these companies were evil for knowing the effects of their product..yet still selling them to consumers that knew the risks (I'm taking in the last 20 years or so). The same thing is starting to happen to the fast-food companies like Mcdonalds. They are starting to take the blame for a person's free choice to consume their unhealthy food. How can a company (or government) possible allow the legalized consumption of something like Cocaine/heroin/Meth? Will there be tort reform so a company can't be sued for deaths or addiction? Until we have a little more personal responsibility, I don't think illegal drugs should be legalized. It's even apparent in your comment: "And these shenanigans, too, would be entirely unnecessary if known drugs were legal and regulated, and people could take controlled risks instead of playing Russian roulette with newly synthesized drugs." It's your personal choice to play roulette with drugs. They aren't required to live and the ones you are talking about have almost no health benefits (we aren't talking about weed here). Yet, you someone blame the government for forcing a person to make this choice. Complete and utter bullshit. We see big companies frequently taking part in tax avoidance by going overseas. Should we also blame the US government for having taxes that are too high? It's the same logic you are using.

MrScruff 12y ago
It's your personal choice to play roulette with drugs. They aren't required to live and the ones you are talking about have almost no health benefits (we aren't talking about weed here). Yet, you someone blame the government for forcing a person to make this choice. Complete and utter bullshit. The government is the organisation that chooses to regulate the behaviour of it's citizens. Why should the citizen need to make a case for need? Shouldn't it be the other way round?
ceejayoz 12y ago
> Cigarette companies are still being sued to this day for causing cancer in users. All the big cases I'm aware of are the ones stemming from their decades-long lies that smoking was not a health risk.
ekianjo 12y ago
> It's your personal choice to play roulette with drugs. They aren't required to live and the ones you are talking about have almost no health benefits (we aren't talking about weed here). Yet, you someone blame the government for forcing a person to make this choice. Complete and utter bullshit. No matter if you forbid it or not people will want to take drugs. The government can either forbid it and cause the raging war on drugs that claims lives, leads to the development of underground mafia organizations, or choose to regulate it and make profit from it while keeping the prices reasonable and under tight control in terms of quality and supply. Your tax money going to the war on drugs has been proven to be completely useless so far, so I can see the benefit of the other point of view.
arjie 12y ago
I believe cigarette companies were charged with misrepresenting their products. Presumably the person you're responding to would accept the cigarette solution: warning labels and sale to non minors only, and hefty fines for misleading advertising if performed.
jessaustin 12y ago
We see big companies frequently taking part in tax avoidance by going overseas. Should we also blame the US government for having taxes that are too high? Yes, the frequency of tax avoidance is proportional to tax rates.
yellowstuff 12y ago
> We see big companies frequently taking part in tax avoidance by going overseas. Should we also blame the US government for having taxes that are too high? This is a common argument in finance and economics articles.
midnightreactor 12y ago
Your ideas regarding personal agency conflict in the post: > Until we have a little more personal responsibility, I don't think illegal drugs should be legalized. > It's your personal choice to play roulette with drugs. The simple truth is that it is always a personal choice, whether it's legal or not. I accept that addiction would be a problem, but addiction is a mental/medical health problem, not a criminal issue. And it's totally fair to blame the government. Drug policy has allowed institutionalized racism to persist, even if not explicitly condoned from the higher echelons of command. Besides that, allowing these drugs to be legally used would allow companies to be made accountable for the health risks, the proceeds could be taxed by the government, and more than anything else, medical research could be performed on a number of these compounds as they hit the street. In my mind, with how much young people these days talk about using molly/ecstasy, let alone research chemicals, testing kits should be more prevalent than condoms, but precaution is the kind of behavior that is stigmatized by overly judgmental people sitting in ivory towers like yourself.

MrScruff 12y ago

It's your personal choice to play roulette with drugs. They aren't required to live and the ones you are talking about have almost no health benefits (we aren't talking about weed here). Yet, you someone blame the government for forcing a person to make this choice. Complete and utter bullshit. The government is the organisation that chooses to regulate the behaviour of it's citizens. Why should the citizen need to make a case for need? Shouldn't it be the other way round?

ceejayoz 12y ago

> Cigarette companies are still being sued to this day for causing cancer in users. All the big cases I'm aware of are the ones stemming from their decades-long lies that smoking was not a health risk.

ekianjo 12y ago

> It's your personal choice to play roulette with drugs. They aren't required to live and the ones you are talking about have almost no health benefits (we aren't talking about weed here). Yet, you someone blame the government for forcing a person to make this choice. Complete and utter bullshit. No matter if you forbid it or not people will want to take drugs. The government can either forbid it and cause the raging war on drugs that claims lives, leads to the development of underground mafia organizations, or choose to regulate it and make profit from it while keeping the prices reasonable and under tight control in terms of quality and supply. Your tax money going to the war on drugs has been proven to be completely useless so far, so I can see the benefit of the other point of view.

arjie 12y ago

I believe cigarette companies were charged with misrepresenting their products. Presumably the person you're responding to would accept the cigarette solution: warning labels and sale to non minors only, and hefty fines for misleading advertising if performed.

jessaustin 12y ago

We see big companies frequently taking part in tax avoidance by going overseas. Should we also blame the US government for having taxes that are too high? Yes, the frequency of tax avoidance is proportional to tax rates.

yellowstuff 12y ago

> We see big companies frequently taking part in tax avoidance by going overseas. Should we also blame the US government for having taxes that are too high? This is a common argument in finance and economics articles.

midnightreactor 12y ago

Your ideas regarding personal agency conflict in the post: > Until we have a little more personal responsibility, I don't think illegal drugs should be legalized. > It's your personal choice to play roulette with drugs. The simple truth is that it is always a personal choice, whether it's legal or not. I accept that addiction would be a problem, but addiction is a mental/medical health problem, not a criminal issue. And it's totally fair to blame the government. Drug policy has allowed institutionalized racism to persist, even if not explicitly condoned from the higher echelons of command. Besides that, allowing these drugs to be legally used would allow companies to be made accountable for the health risks, the proceeds could be taxed by the government, and more than anything else, medical research could be performed on a number of these compounds as they hit the street. In my mind, with how much young people these days talk about using molly/ecstasy, let alone research chemicals, testing kits should be more prevalent than condoms, but precaution is the kind of behavior that is stigmatized by overly judgmental people sitting in ivory towers like yourself.