Why? Why not
Most Helpful Guy
I think so, they offer no value expect to harm people1
By that logic alcohol would also be banned?
I don't think weed or alcohol should be illegal. Cigarettes should never have been invented. There is no purpose except getting people addicted to buy more.
Maybe drugs, but I'm not sure about cigarettes and weed, I think we need them, look at our life it's not perfect, if we ban them all our life become unlivable, if we want better life then we need to fix our problems, most of our problems coming from our life standarts, poor become more poor, rich getting more money etc.
If we fix our world problems (or better term "treat") then I'm sure people going to ban these things by themselves. Baning now will make the people more aggressive. :/
Yeah, I remember alcohol got banned once. It was even an amendment... Well we still drink don't we?
They are all forms of self harm so yes
Yes. I think so.
Pot should not be banned, we've gone through so much time to have it legalized why would we throw that away. Pot is mine, as well as many others, medicine!
Yes, they should.
No, everything should always be the choice The People. Freedom!!
A plant should not be banned. However cancer causing agents should be.
No. In my opinion, all drugs, whether very soft or very hard (from coffee to heroin) should be legalized and be freely purchasable for anyone over the age of 18 in designated shops owned and run by the government.
- Personal responsibility. I am 26 years old. I am an adult and know how to live my life. I don't need people to patronize me, force their moral opinions on me and tell me how to live.
- Personal freedom. As human being that was born freely into this world, I don't believe in such restrictions.
- The war on drugs has miserably failed. If there is anyone who doesn't think so, they must have been living under a rock for the past 50 years. The US alone has spent roughly 1,2 trillion dollars on the war on drugs since 1971. Well, do we live in a drug-free world now? Hehe, not exactly. In fact, there are good indications that people who live in countries with liberal drug laws act more responsibly. One example: When I was living in America, I was shocked to see how some teenagers abuse alcohol. Some of my friends had little parties in the basement of their parents house while the parents were out or sleeping. The parties were basically just about one thing: getting wasted. I don't even know where these guys got all that booze from... I guess they asked a "nice" buddy who was already over 21. One time, my best friend had to go to the hospital because he got so wasted that he had an accident walking home. I am Swiss and Greek (mom is Swiss, dad is Greek) and in both countries, this kind of stuff isn't so common. In Switzerland, beer and wine can be bought at age 16. Hard liquors at 18. Kids do go a little crazy but generally speaking, they take it more easy because 15 or 16 is usually just about the age when you get interested in this stuff. So it's not like in America where you have to wait for years and then you finally have so much build up desire that you literally drink yourself into a hospital. Once they get into University, people in Switzerland all drink very moderately. Crazy drunk college parties are practically non-existent. In Greece, even kids get to drink alcohol. My dad would sometimes give me and my sister some red wine for dinner, even when we were 6 or 7 years old. We just grew up with it. It was like milk or juice to us in the sense that it wasn't anything special. There was no taboo about it. Maybe that's why I never went crazy with alcohol and I've always drank it very moderately.
No, because anytime you ban something you drive it underground into a black market. We already have this because of the War on Drugs. It is already a reality that we need to escape. People still buy and sell such products, but there is no taxation collected, the products are completely unregulated (and often more harmful than their original forms) and fill our prisons with mostly non-violent offenders. Simply put, for possessing certain plants and chemicals that the government has deemed "no-no" they put you in a box and say that you must be ashamed and never associate with society until they give the go ahead.
What we really need is comprehensive drug rehabilitation reform so that drug addicts can have the opportunity to get treatment and actually become a person again instead of a hollow shell that is enslaved to some substance. It is, of course, people's individual choices to start using harmful substances in the first place. They must accept this. But talk to any addict and they will tell you that it quickly gets out of control and they feel helpless, many times to the point of suicide.
Of course, this also gets to the point of "who should pay for all this?" Excellent question. Many taxpayers would be morally opposed, and that is fine with me. I can understand the attitude, especially for people that use no drugs. I'm not sure who should, but I think starting community centers that are directly funded via donations (or tax-specific to the individual) might work. I think you could rally enough support around the idea if you could establish one center that proved success. Perhaps looking at successful addiction/rehab centers now would sway some individuals.
If all drugs were legalized tomorrow, I would not go out and buy heroin or many other substances. I doubt you would either. But my guess is that increase in quality/decrease in price would dramatically lower drug-related crime, while putting illegal cartels out of business (or forcing them to pay taxes). The DEA would be abolished, saving $2 billion in allotted funds, and cops would be forced to concentrate on traffic/violent crimes instead of petty possession. Countries (like Mexico) that funnel drugs could finally have cash crops, etc. etc.
I'm not sure what would happen to the stigma about drugs, though. I believe it will always be there. People don't like to see people fucking themselves up on various things (even alcohol). Such is human nature and understandable.
Hope this was informative.
No they shouldn't. The war on drugs is a lossing and extremely expensive battle. The only drugs that should be illegal are ones that WILL fuck up your life like meth and heroin.
No, drugs should be banned. Banning it will just make the rate of drug use higher.
Every drug should be decriminalised and all of the money spent on enforcing the laws of banned drugs, should be spent on treating drug addiction and drug-related problems.
everyone's source of drug should be at medical centres where they know they are getting clean stuff and not tampered gear.
Yes I would agree with that
No. On the contrary, all drugs should be legal.
Yes, drugs should be banned. Legalizing marijuana is a terrible idea.
If people wanna kill dem selves I think they should be allowed to. It's natural selection m8.
Cigarettes have a lot of horrible ingredients in them and has been responsible for hundreds of thousands if not more deaths. With weed it is just a plant with no additive ingredients. It is used to treat numerous medical problems with very little if any serious side effects. It literally baffles my mind that cigarettes are legal knowing how dangerous they are and yet weed something natural with great treatment of medical problems is not.
If they do it they should go the whole hog considering how inconsistent and stupid the controls on substances are. But really they should just legalize weed because it's not as bad as tobacco considering you don't HAVE to smoke it.
You cannot undo this action. The opinion owner is going to be notified and earn 7 XPER points.