Besides murder and theft what one law, if abolished, would cause total havoc?

[Cookie]

Originally posted by: krunchykrome

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: krunchykrome
That particular part of my quote would lead you to believe that I felt that was the only reason why people didnt consume drugs. But did you read any of my earlier/later comments? I thought I stated that there were more reasons why people choose not to use drugs, and that was only one reason.

You say that alcohol is as addictive as any illegal drug. That might be the case, however if someone were to go out to happy hour once a week, I dont think it would go any further than that and it probably wouldnt lead to an addiction. However, if that same person decided to shoot up heroin once a week or do meth after work once a week, I would bet that person would have a deadly addiction soon enough, and eventually consume the drug more frequently. I hope that makes sense.

My argument was that the legality of drugs is one (of many) deterrents from using them. With the legalization of drugs, Id think that some people might be willing to try them out as oppose to them being illegal.

Dosage is everything. If a person were to get roaring drunk at happy hour every week (instead of maybe just a couple of drinks, as is usual), they would be just as likely to develop a serious alcohol addiction as if it were meth or heroin, and to eventually consume more frequently. So no, you don't make sense, because what you are saying is untrue -- simply an opinion of "alcohol good, drugs bad" based on prejudice you most likely picked up from propaganda. Think about what you said. Addiction has little to do with frequency. A person who gets drunk once a week can be just as addicted as a person who abuses more frequently.

And you know the REAL reason why most people don't abuse drugs (including alcohol and tobacco)? Because they all have negative health-related side effects. Most people don't drink to excess very often because they don't like the hangover. Most illegal drugs are similar. You might get high, but afterwards you feel like hell (the meth "hangover," or "comedown" as they are usually called with drugs I believe, is absolutely brutal I have been told). And look at what happens to health of addicts, from meth to heroin to alcohol to tobacco, after long-term abuse! The law has very little to do with that, and actually makes it worse by increasing the cost to addicts (and thus their burden on society) and making it more difficult for them to seek rehabilitation.

I dont agree with you. We can dance all night, but I find your opinion as ridiculous as you find mine regarding that first paragraph you wrote.

The second paragraph you wrote is again completely misunderstanding what Im saying which leads me to believe again that you lack comprehension skills.

krunchykrome: Are you even trying to understand the other point of view? Or do you just want to toss about "lack comprehension skills" comments? You keep repeating yourself, we all get your points, but I think you are the one who is not understanding the other point of view. Try to listen to what others are saying, and maybe comment on their thoughts instead of saying "you lack comprehension skills" over and over.

 

[krunchykrome]

Originally posted by: Cookie

Originally posted by: krunchykrome

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: krunchykrome
That particular part of my quote would lead you to believe that I felt that was the only reason why people didnt consume drugs. But did you read any of my earlier/later comments? I thought I stated that there were more reasons why people choose not to use drugs, and that was only one reason.

You say that alcohol is as addictive as any illegal drug. That might be the case, however if someone were to go out to happy hour once a week, I dont think it would go any further than that and it probably wouldnt lead to an addiction. However, if that same person decided to shoot up heroin once a week or do meth after work once a week, I would bet that person would have a deadly addiction soon enough, and eventually consume the drug more frequently. I hope that makes sense.

My argument was that the legality of drugs is one (of many) deterrents from using them. With the legalization of drugs, Id think that some people might be willing to try them out as oppose to them being illegal.

Dosage is everything. If a person were to get roaring drunk at happy hour every week (instead of maybe just a couple of drinks, as is usual), they would be just as likely to develop a serious alcohol addiction as if it were meth or heroin, and to eventually consume more frequently. So no, you don't make sense, because what you are saying is untrue -- simply an opinion of "alcohol good, drugs bad" based on prejudice you most likely picked up from propaganda. Think about what you said. Addiction has little to do with frequency. A person who gets drunk once a week can be just as addicted as a person who abuses more frequently.

And you know the REAL reason why most people don't abuse drugs (including alcohol and tobacco)? Because they all have negative health-related side effects. Most people don't drink to excess very often because they don't like the hangover. Most illegal drugs are similar. You might get high, but afterwards you feel like hell (the meth "hangover," or "comedown" as they are usually called with drugs I believe, is absolutely brutal I have been told). And look at what happens to health of addicts, from meth to heroin to alcohol to tobacco, after long-term abuse! The law has very little to do with that, and actually makes it worse by increasing the cost to addicts (and thus their burden on society) and making it more difficult for them to seek rehabilitation.

I dont agree with you. We can dance all night, but I find your opinion as ridiculous as you find mine regarding that first paragraph you wrote.

The second paragraph you wrote is again completely misunderstanding what Im saying which leads me to believe again that you lack comprehension skills.

krunchykrome: Are you even trying to understand the other point of view? Or do you just want to toss about "lack comprehension skills" comments? You keep repeating yourself, we all get your points, but I think you are the one who is not understanding the other point of view. Try to listen to what others are saying, and maybe comment on their thoughts instead of saying "you lack comprehension skills" over and over.

What Vic is insisting that I was saying was that the legality of drugs is the only reason people choose not to use them. I never said this. What I said (for the hundreth time) was it is one of the reasons people choose not to use them, and based upon that statement, I went further with an example of how that might cause a problem in society.

So, after repeating that over and over again, he still seems to believe that Im firmly believe legality of drugs is the only deterrent for using them. What more can I say but point out the lacking comprehension skills.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: krunchykrome

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: krunchykrome
That particular part of my quote would lead you to believe that I felt that was the only reason why people didnt consume drugs. But did you read any of my earlier/later comments? I thought I stated that there were more reasons why people choose not to use drugs, and that was only one reason.

You say that alcohol is as addictive as any illegal drug. That might be the case, however if someone were to go out to happy hour once a week, I dont think it would go any further than that and it probably wouldnt lead to an addiction. However, if that same person decided to shoot up heroin once a week or do meth after work once a week, I would bet that person would have a deadly addiction soon enough, and eventually consume the drug more frequently. I hope that makes sense.

My argument was that the legality of drugs is one (of many) deterrents from using them. With the legalization of drugs, Id think that some people might be willing to try them out as oppose to them being illegal.

Dosage is everything. If a person were to get roaring drunk at happy hour every week (instead of maybe just a couple of drinks, as is usual), they would be just as likely to develop a serious alcohol addiction as if it were meth or heroin, and to eventually consume more frequently. So no, you don't make sense, because what you are saying is untrue -- simply an opinion of "alcohol good, drugs bad" based on prejudice you most likely picked up from propaganda. Think about what you said. Addiction has little to do with frequency. A person who gets drunk once a week can be just as addicted as a person who abuses more frequently.

And you know the REAL reason why most people don't abuse drugs (including alcohol and tobacco)? Because they all have negative health-related side effects. Most people don't drink to excess very often because they don't like the hangover. Most illegal drugs are similar. You might get high, but afterwards you feel like hell (the meth "hangover," or "comedown" as they are usually called with drugs I believe, is absolutely brutal I have been told). And look at what happens to health of addicts, from meth to heroin to alcohol to tobacco, after long-term abuse! The law has very little to do with that, and actually makes it worse by increasing the cost to addicts (and thus their burden on society) and making it more difficult for them to seek rehabilitation.

I dont agree with you. We can dance all night, but I find your opinion as ridiculous as you find mine regarding that first paragraph you wrote.

The second paragraph you wrote is again completely misunderstanding what Im saying which leads me to believe again that you lack comprehension skills.

You don't agree about what? Alcohol's addicitiveness is a proven, documented fact. I suggest you visit an AA meeting and talk to some of the recovering addicts there. Maybe then you might get some firsthand knowledge instead of just blowing this sh!t out your ass.

Lack of comprehension skills? Who's? Yours? Here's a clue for you: if drug laws supposedly do so much to deter people from abusing drugs, then why do abuse rates always go up with increased enforcement? And why does a larger percentage of Americans abuse drugs NOW, after almost 100 years of prohibition, than did when drugs were legal?


edit: read your last post. That is not at all what I am saying (even though you did in fact say that). What I am saying is that your argument that laws deter people (even if just a little bit) from using drugs is completely and factually false. If anything, the laws encourage increased abuse because of a lack of regulation, an increase in profit motive, and reduced rehabilitation availability for addicts (as we lock up addicts, not rehab them). Your contention that alcohol is less addictive/harmful than illegal drugs is also completely false.

 

[Cookie]

Originally posted by: krunchykrome


What Vic is insisting that I was saying was that the legality of drugs is the only reason people choose not to use them. I never said this. What I said (for the hundreth time) was it is one of the reasons people choose not to use them, and based upon that statement, I went further with an example of how that might cause a problem in society.

So, after repeating that over and over again, he still seems to believe that Im firmly believe legality of drugs is the only deterrent for using them. What more can I say but point out the lacking comprehension skills.

I don't think anyone is insisting that is what you think. Because afterall, you DID say it 100 times. Maybe we could move past this point and you could address the other points now?

 

[krunchykrome]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: krunchykrome

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: krunchykrome
That particular part of my quote would lead you to believe that I felt that was the only reason why people didnt consume drugs. But did you read any of my earlier/later comments? I thought I stated that there were more reasons why people choose not to use drugs, and that was only one reason.

You say that alcohol is as addictive as any illegal drug. That might be the case, however if someone were to go out to happy hour once a week, I dont think it would go any further than that and it probably wouldnt lead to an addiction. However, if that same person decided to shoot up heroin once a week or do meth after work once a week, I would bet that person would have a deadly addiction soon enough, and eventually consume the drug more frequently. I hope that makes sense.

My argument was that the legality of drugs is one (of many) deterrents from using them. With the legalization of drugs, Id think that some people might be willing to try them out as oppose to them being illegal.

Dosage is everything. If a person were to get roaring drunk at happy hour every week (instead of maybe just a couple of drinks, as is usual), they would be just as likely to develop a serious alcohol addiction as if it were meth or heroin, and to eventually consume more frequently. So no, you don't make sense, because what you are saying is untrue -- simply an opinion of "alcohol good, drugs bad" based on prejudice you most likely picked up from propaganda. Think about what you said. Addiction has little to do with frequency. A person who gets drunk once a week can be just as addicted as a person who abuses more frequently.

And you know the REAL reason why most people don't abuse drugs (including alcohol and tobacco)? Because they all have negative health-related side effects. Most people don't drink to excess very often because they don't like the hangover. Most illegal drugs are similar. You might get high, but afterwards you feel like hell (the meth "hangover," or "comedown" as they are usually called with drugs I believe, is absolutely brutal I have been told). And look at what happens to health of addicts, from meth to heroin to alcohol to tobacco, after long-term abuse! The law has very little to do with that, and actually makes it worse by increasing the cost to addicts (and thus their burden on society) and making it more difficult for them to seek rehabilitation.

I dont agree with you. We can dance all night, but I find your opinion as ridiculous as you find mine regarding that first paragraph you wrote.

The second paragraph you wrote is again completely misunderstanding what Im saying which leads me to believe again that you lack comprehension skills.

You don't agree about what? Alcohol's addicitiveness is a proven, documented fact. I suggest you visit an AA meeting and talk to some of the recovering addicts there. Maybe then you might get some firsthand knowledge instead of just blowing this sh!t out your ass.

Lack of comprehension skills? Who's? Yours? Here's a clue for you: if drug laws supposedly do so much to deter people from abusing drugs, then why do abuse rates always go up with increased enforcement? And why does a larger percentage of Americans abuse drugs NOW, after almost 100 years of prohibition, than did when drugs were legal?


edit: read your last post. That is not at all what I am saying (even though you did in fact say that). What I am saying is that your argument that laws deter people (even if just a little bit) from using drugs is completely and factually false. If anything, the law encourage abuse because of a lack of regulation, an increase in profit motive, and reduced rehabilitation for addicts. Your contention that alcohol is less addictive/harmful than illegal drugs is also completely false.

There is no denying on my part that alcohol cannot be addictive.

You believe that the average Joe who has a few drinks on Monday night is prone to the same addiction inevitable to the average Joe who shoots a little heroin every Monday?
Yes, if you drink yourself silly, you're bound to develop an addiction, but what Im saying is that casual alcohol consumption cannot be as addictive as casual illegal drug consumption.


About the legality deterring drug use; if drugs were to be made legal, you would probably start seeing drug bars, much like those in Amsterdam that serve Marijuana. If drug consumption were made legal, what makes you believe that Americans wont walk into one of these bars much like they do with alcohol bars?

 

[yllus]

Any laws against the legal possession of property (I don't mean "possession" as in drugs, just normal things) or the laws allowing you to protect your property would lead to a complete breakdown of orderly civilization.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: krunchykrome
There is no denying on my part that alcohol cannot be addictive.

You believe that the average Joe who has a few drinks on Monday night is prone to the same addiction inevitable to the average Joe who shoots a little heroin every Monday?
Yes, if you drink yourself silly, you're bound to develop an addiction, but what Im saying is that casual alcohol consumption cannot be as addictive as casual illegal drug consumption.


About the legality deterring drug use; if drugs were to be made legal, you would probably start seeing drug bars, much like those in Amsterdam that serve Marijuana. If drug consumption were made legal, what makes you believe that Americans wont walk into one of these bars much like they do with alcohol bars?

To the first part, like I said, dosage is everything.

To the second part, yeah, that would be terrible with all these alcohol bars that are already everywhere.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: krunchykrome
About the legality deterring drug use; if drugs were to be made legal, you would probably start seeing drug bars, much like those in Amsterdam that serve Marijuana. If drug consumption were made legal, what makes you believe that Americans wont walk into one of these bars much like they do with alcohol bars?

Anyone that wants to smoke marijuana in this country and isn't subject to drug testing is probably already doing so. I can all but guarantee you that some of the people you work with that you would never suspect smoke pot, do smoke pot. I've been surprised a number of times by who does it (for one example, a hard-core conservative Bush supporter who loves to go hunting and goes to church every sunday, and prays before every meal).

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: yllus
Any laws against the legal possession of property (I don't mean "possession" as in drugs, just normal things) or the laws allowing you to protect your property would lead to a complete breakdown of orderly civilization.

WINNER!!

The protection of property rights is why governments are formed in the first place.

Anyone disagree? How would you like to be robbed of everything you own?

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: yllus
Any laws against the legal possession of property (I don't mean "possession" as in drugs, just normal things) or the laws allowing you to protect your property would lead to a complete breakdown of orderly civilization.

WINNER!!

The protection of property rights is why governments are formed in the first place.

Anyone disagree? How would you like to be robbed of everything you own?

Yeah, that sounds right.
I walk into your house with a couple of friends and a couple of guns:
"This is my house now. Get out."

 

[krunchykrome]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: krunchykrome
There is no denying on my part that alcohol cannot be addictive.

You believe that the average Joe who has a few drinks on Monday night is prone to the same addiction inevitable to the average Joe who shoots a little heroin every Monday?
Yes, if you drink yourself silly, you're bound to develop an addiction, but what Im saying is that casual alcohol consumption cannot be as addictive as casual illegal drug consumption.


About the legality deterring drug use; if drugs were to be made legal, you would probably start seeing drug bars, much like those in Amsterdam that serve Marijuana. If drug consumption were made legal, what makes you believe that Americans wont walk into one of these bars much like they do with alcohol bars?

To the first part, like I said, dosage is everything.

To the second part, yeah, that would be terrible with all these alcohol bars that are already everywhere.

Dosage is everything, right. But the average American is not an alcoholic, but rather a casual drinker. However, casual consumption of drugs such as heroin would have a much different addicting effect on that person than the casual alcohol consumption would have.

This brings us back to the legality of drugs and whether or not it is a deterrent to some. Whether or not legalizing drugs would entice the average Joe to try them. I say that legally available drugs would entice some users, while you say that it would not. I dont think we can go any further upon that than to just accept each others "opinion".

 

[Cookie]

Originally posted by: krunchykrome


Dosage is everything, right. But the average American is not an alcoholic, but rather a casual drinker. However, casual consumption of drugs such as heroin would have a much different addicting effect on that person than the casual alcohol consumption would have.

This brings us back to the legality of drugs and whether or not it is a deterrent to some. Whether or not legalizing drugs would entice the average Joe to try them. I say that legally available drugs would entice some users, while you say that it would not. I dont think we can go any further upon that than to just accept each others "opinion".

Or we could legalize them and see what happens.
krunchykrome would YOU try heroin if suddenly tomorrow it was legal?

 

[krunchykrome]

Originally posted by: Cookie

Originally posted by: krunchykrome


Dosage is everything, right. But the average American is not an alcoholic, but rather a casual drinker. However, casual consumption of drugs such as heroin would have a much different addicting effect on that person than the casual alcohol consumption would have.

This brings us back to the legality of drugs and whether or not it is a deterrent to some. Whether or not legalizing drugs would entice the average Joe to try them. I say that legally available drugs would entice some users, while you say that it would not. I dont think we can go any further upon that than to just accept each others "opinion".

Or we could legalize them and see what happens.
krunchykrome would YOU try heroin if suddenly tomorrow it was legal?

Absolutly not, but it's also a doubtful assumption that the rest of the population has the same common sense as I have

 

[Cookie]

Originally posted by: krunchykrome

Originally posted by: Cookie

Originally posted by: krunchykrome


Dosage is everything, right. But the average American is not an alcoholic, but rather a casual drinker. However, casual consumption of drugs such as heroin would have a much different addicting effect on that person than the casual alcohol consumption would have.

This brings us back to the legality of drugs and whether or not it is a deterrent to some. Whether or not legalizing drugs would entice the average Joe to try them. I say that legally available drugs would entice some users, while you say that it would not. I dont think we can go any further upon that than to just accept each others "opinion".

Or we could legalize them and see what happens.
krunchykrome would YOU try heroin if suddenly tomorrow it was legal?

Absolutly not, but it's also a doubtful assumption that the rest of the population has the same common sense as I have

Again we disagree.

 

[ebaycj]

Originally posted by: krunchykrome

Originally posted by: clamum

Originally posted by: jtvang125
I think legalizing illegal drugs would start causing the most chaos. What do you guys say?

Why?

Could you imagine living in a world with druggies everywhere? At least now that it's illegal, they keep to themselves for the most part and they do it within privacy because it is illegal and they do not want to get caught. I certainly don't want to live in a society where people are drugged up and high can roam freely without consequence.

Krome:

You sure have a strange perspective for a guy who has the pot-smoking-hippie as his avatar ! :roll:

 

[2Xtreme21]

Everyone DOES realize that legality has VERY LITTLE to do with the availability of drugs? If someone wants to casually experiment with a drug, then they're going to casually experiment with it-- legal or not. With the way it stands now, though, all the money being funneled to drug lords goes who knows where... If the government were to legalize and start taxing things like marijuana, one could at least have the peace of mind of knowing where the cash is going.

Plus, all those against drug legalization, do you really feel as though your government should be responsible for being your nanny? I personally believe in the philosophy that your rights should be extended infinitely until you cross the line where they interfere with someone else's rights. If Joe Smith down the street smokes a little weed now and then and sits in his basement for 8 hours watching cartoons and playing mario party, do you think he should get in trouble for what he's doing?

 

[TravisT]

Laws define how society views things over time. Take slavery for example, it became illegal to discriminate or be racist. And although we certainly still have it in our country, it is dwindly rather quickly when you take a step back and look at things.

If you legalize drugs that doesn't mean that everyone who doesn't do drugs will become addicts. However, it does mean that society will eventually look at drugs as an acceptable thing.

You can also take other things that are slowly (based on our lifespan) changing overtime, such as abortion and homosexuality. You can pretty much take anything that you consider to be immoral, and if the laws say it is okay, overtime people will believe it.

 

[Atheus]

If recreational drugs were legal, exactly the same number of people would use them as do now. I ask you as a non drug user - is it the law that keeps you from using? Or a belief that it would be detrimental to your life?

Personally I do use drugs, and I don't care about the legality of them. It changes so often around here it's almost pointless to try to follow the law anyway... so now mushrooms are still legal but growing them is not? How are we supposed to get them then? Pot has been downgraded - does that mean it's less bad for me than it was last year? Should I now smoke more pot? Who knows.

Along the same lines, but more seriously, how many people do you think would actually rape someone just because the law was removed? They would have to be completely morally bankrupt to start with, and if they were, why would they let the law stop them in the first place?

 

[GZeus]

Originally posted by: yllus
Any laws against the legal possession of property (I don't mean "possession" as in drugs, just normal things) or the laws allowing you to protect your property would lead to a complete breakdown of orderly civilization.

'Eminent Domain' leaps to mind. I honestly don't mind paying reasonable taxes but taking my land to "benefit the community" - an undefinable term at best - is just unAmerican.

 

[wetcat007]

Copyright laws, we'd all be doomed!!!!!!

lol

 

[Ilmater]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
Gravity.

I know I'm late to this party, but this answer is awesome.

 

[invidia]

Treason. People from top government departments would be giving out US secrets to our enemies.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: krunchykrome

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: krunchykrome
There is no denying on my part that alcohol cannot be addictive.

You believe that the average Joe who has a few drinks on Monday night is prone to the same addiction inevitable to the average Joe who shoots a little heroin every Monday?
Yes, if you drink yourself silly, you're bound to develop an addiction, but what Im saying is that casual alcohol consumption cannot be as addictive as casual illegal drug consumption.


About the legality deterring drug use; if drugs were to be made legal, you would probably start seeing drug bars, much like those in Amsterdam that serve Marijuana. If drug consumption were made legal, what makes you believe that Americans wont walk into one of these bars much like they do with alcohol bars?

To the first part, like I said, dosage is everything.

To the second part, yeah, that would be terrible with all these alcohol bars that are already everywhere.

Dosage is everything, right. But the average American is not an alcoholic, but rather a casual drinker. However, casual consumption of drugs such as heroin would have a much different addicting effect on that person than the casual alcohol consumption would have.

This brings us back to the legality of drugs and whether or not it is a deterrent to some. Whether or not legalizing drugs would entice the average Joe to try them. I say that legally available drugs would entice some users, while you say that it would not. I dont think we can go any further upon that than to just accept each others "opinion".

And despite the propaganda to the contrary, not everyone that uses drugs is a hardcore addict. I know a surprising number of people who use cocaine now and then. Not frequently, maybe a few times a year. Some of them are musicians, some are small business owners, some are technical. They come in all shapes and sizes, and you wouldn't know it by looking at them. Yeah, I know what those anti-drug commercials look like. As soon as you touch drugs, you either turn into a complete burnout, or a homicidal maniac. It doesn't work that way. The fact is that people that want to do drugs, do drugs. They're easy to get despite the myriad drug laws.

 

[sponge008]

Being in high school, I can say that most of the drug use that goes on is precisely BECAUSE they are illegal, so it's "cool" to use drugs.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: krunchykrome

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: krunchykrome

Originally posted by: MixMasterTang

Originally posted by: krunchykrome

Originally posted by: clamum

Originally posted by: jtvang125
I think legalizing illegal drugs would start causing the most chaos. What do you guys say?

Why?

Could you imagine living in a world with druggies everywhere? At least now that it's illegal, they keep to themselves for the most part and they do it within privacy because it is illegal and they do not want to get caught. I certainly don't want to live in a society where people are drugged up and high can roam freely without consequence.

Legalizing drugs does not make tresspassing, driving under the influence, public intoxication, public disorder, etc. legal as well so I don't see how this will enable them to "roam freely without consequence" any more than they could already do now. You aren't allowed to just walk around drinking beer now and causing a ruckus even though alcohol is legal.

Drugs are extremely addictive. If they are to be made illegal, people are more prone to try them out. They may only intend to try it out and experience it once, but they might then find themselves addicted. The laws against drugs deter people from trying them out. Look at alcohol; how many people professionals go drinking at happy hour after work.....plenty. Alcohol isnt nearly as addictive as drugs, so casual drinkers arent likely to become alcoholics. If alcohol were to be made illegal, the general public, those that abide by laws would not want to take the chances and break the law. The law deters those from participating in such activities. If drugs were to be made legal, casual drug users would soon become addicts and many lives would be wasted.

Your knowledge of history is seariously lacking.

Prohibition did NOTHING to stop drinking. There were more speakeasies during prohibition than there were bars before prohibition.

The illegality of drugs has caused far more harm than drugs themselves.

My point was that legalizing drugs would entice a lot of curious people to experience with them, maybe consume them casually much like they do with alcohol. The only difference is that alcohol is not nearly as addictive as drugs are. I think a lot of good people would soon ruin their lives. And no, I dont think most people would have enough common sense to "just say no" if they were made legal.

I agree with KK. I think I would be a coke addict if it weren't illegal.