Keep Your Laws Off My Body

[Genx87]

So how would society deal with the "legal" meth or crack addict? Does he get government meth? If so, for how long? If not, he is still going to break into my house to steal stuff to support his habit.

Nevada has shown us that legal prostitution can be safe... but I don't see how legalizing a whole slew of drugs will suddenly make crime go away. And maybe people are not regular users of heroin because it is difficult to get. Include oxycontin users in the number of regular users and I bet it will be a lot higher.

How do we deal with alcoholics?

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

If that legislation were to take place with a libertarian view though it would only affect persons whom are pregnant and only during the term of pregnancy. I am not advocating this or even saying it is practical but it would be possible to support a libertarian point of view regarding drugs when it only affects your body while exempting the special circumstance of pregnancy when what you do has an effect on a person other than yourself.

So would pregnant people have to register their pregnancy with the government? How about report for weekly drug tests? Would their personal doctors report their status to the authorities? Would cops harass any fat chicks who light up a smoke or take drink? There's no way you can implement this through a libertarian view.

 

[rudder]

But what % of the market is made up of bathtub juice? I can't imagine it's much.

I have no idea... probably it is limited due to the size of the product. It is very hard to move a lot of illegal whiskey around the country. There are some dry counties here in Tennessee where I bet it makes up 50% of the market.

You don't need to have an opinion on that. Heroin is addicting, although demonstrably less so than tobacco (nicotene), and not much more (if at all more) than alcohol. Nevertheless, you can safely use Heroin (assuming it's clean stuff) by carefully dosing and spacing out your usage so you don't become dependant.

But don't you think that is a tall order to ask of someone? Particularly if they spend the day screwing on widgets in a factory or some other menial job... or even the people prone to addiction? Here in Tennessee you cannot buy sudafed OTC... you have to show a pharmacist your drivers license and it gets scanned in. I suppose states could manage dosing that way... but then you will find a lucrative black market pop up to make stuff available. I just don't think the general population could manage dosing and spacing out days where they would use heroin.

Another angle is that all those heroin warlords are not all of a sudden going to flood the market and offer cheap heroin. They will manipulate supply to keep demand up... driving up prices. I am not sure there are a whole lot of places in the U.S. conducive to growing heroin. high prices for an addicting substance spells trouble. With alcohol at least I can buy a bottle of Mad Dog 20/20 for a few dollars.

I suppose we have a good case study with the Netherlands since heroin has been legal for some time (hard to find a non-biased site). I do know they had a very low number of heroin addicts prior to legalizing its use. Now the Dutch government gives away heroin to addicts. That is not going to fly with the American taxpayer.

 

[Carmen813]

I'd congratulate you, but there's no reason to be proud of stupidity.

The fact that they were moral busybodies doesn't change the fact that they were also progressive. The progressives of today are moral busybodies as well.

If my memory serves correctly, aren't Protestants considered a progressive religion when compared to things like Catholicism?

 

[SirStev0]

Fun Fact: Religious Fundamentalists were in large part to blame for alcohol prohibition.

According to some people around here, God-fearing Politicians are the only thing that will save America. Connect the dots.

Fixed it for you.

 

[Linflas]

So would pregnant people have to register their pregnancy with the government? How about report for weekly drug tests? Would their personal doctors report their status to the authorities? Would cops harass any fat chicks who light up a smoke or take drink? There's no way you can implement this through a libertarian view.

It would really require none of that. If a it were law it could be as simple as requiring doctors to report it if it is the cause of some problem or event during pregnancy requiring treatment or the baby is born with some type of defect or syndrome that is the result of drug usage. Understand I am in no way advocating this, it is just an interesting argument to me.

 

[crownjules]

There is still a burgeoning illegal whiskey market. You know why? Whiskey tax. Make your own whiskey, sell it without having to pay the feds and you can make a lot of money. Moonshine is some good stuff...you can buy it in some stores... but it is taxed. So a lot of people make it up in the hills. Do you think hard core drugs would be any different?

Moonshine is illegal for safety concerns. The poor of Appalachia produce a surplus of corn and sugar crops which are the primary ingredients. But it is illegal to setup an unlicensed distillery because using poor equipment can contribute contaminants to the product that are poisonous or deadly. Of course these poor folks don't have the money to buy commercially licensed and approved stills so they use whatever to make their moonshine. There's no legal market for their product, since it's creation process is illegal, so it has to be sold via the black market.

The whiskey tax of 1791 was repealed in 1803.

I have no idea... probably it is limited due to the size of the product. It is very hard to move a lot of illegal whiskey around the country. There are some dry counties here in Tennessee where I bet it makes up 50% of the market.

Well you can't really use dry counties as an example. These are places where local prohibition laws were never repealed. Therefore, residents are either forced to drive sometimes long distances to purchase a product that's sale is legal in the majority of the US or bypass the inconvenience by resorting to the "black market".

 

[Blackjack200]

I have no idea... probably it is limited due to the size of the product. It is very hard to move a lot of illegal whiskey around the country. There are some dry counties here in Tennessee where I bet it makes up 50% of the market.

I've never seen it up here at all (NJ). I'd be scared of drinking from a bad batch and getting killed or something.

But don't you think that is a tall order to ask of someone? Particularly if they spend the day screwing on widgets in a factory or some other menial job... or even the people prone to addiction? Here in Tennessee you cannot buy sudafed OTC... you have to show a pharmacist your drivers license and it gets scanned in. I suppose states could manage dosing that way... but then you will find a lucrative black market pop up to make stuff available. I just don't think the general population could manage dosing and spacing out days where they would use heroin.

The uncomfortable reality is that some people will become addicted and some people will die. But that is already happening as a result of our current drug laws. Heroin is not particularly toxic, and while constant use can ruin your health over the the long term, making it illegal is not the answer.

Another angle is that all those heroin warlords are not all of a sudden going to flood the market and offer cheap heroin. They will manipulate supply to keep demand up... driving up prices. I am not sure there are a whole lot of places in the U.S. conducive to growing heroin. high prices for an addicting substance spells trouble. With alcohol at least I can buy a bottle of Mad Dog 20/20 for a few dollars.

The price of heroin would collapse if it were legalized. The opium poppy is "...widely grown as an ornamental flower throughout Europe, North America, South America, and Asia."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_poppy

I suppose we have a good case study with the Netherlands since heroin has been legal for some time (hard to find a non-biased site). I do know they had a very low number of heroin addicts prior to legalizing its use. Now the Dutch government gives away heroin to addicts. That is not going to fly with the American taxpayer.

Saying Heroin is "legal" in the Netherlands isn't really accurate:

It is available for prescription under tight regulation to long-term heroin addicts for whom methadone maintenance treatment has failed. Heroin is exclusively available for prescription to long-term heroin addicts, and cannot be used to treat severe pain or other illnesses.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin

What I'm talking about is complete legalization.

 

[werepossum]

I have no idea... probably it is limited due to the size of the product. It is very hard to move a lot of illegal whiskey around the country. There are some dry counties here in Tennessee where I bet it makes up 50% of the market.

But don't you think that is a tall order to ask of someone? Particularly if they spend the day screwing on widgets in a factory or some other menial job... or even the people prone to addiction? Here in Tennessee you cannot buy sudafed OTC... you have to show a pharmacist your drivers license and it gets scanned in. I suppose states could manage dosing that way... but then you will find a lucrative black market pop up to make stuff available. I just don't think the general population could manage dosing and spacing out days where they would use heroin.

Another angle is that all those heroin warlords are not all of a sudden going to flood the market and offer cheap heroin. They will manipulate supply to keep demand up... driving up prices. I am not sure there are a whole lot of places in the U.S. conducive to growing heroin. high prices for an addicting substance spells trouble. With alcohol at least I can buy a bottle of Mad Dog 20/20 for a few dollars.

I suppose we have a good case study with the Netherlands since heroin has been legal for some time (hard to find a non-biased site). I do know they had a very low number of heroin addicts prior to legalizing its use. Now the Dutch government gives away heroin to addicts. That is not going to fly with the American taxpayer.

At least half of liquor in dry counties is unbonded, and a fair amount in wet counties. I once delivered shine and a lot went to small bars in wet counties too. And the best liquor I ever tasted was a homemade apple brandy - like fiery liquid pussy with a faint apple taste.

Funny thing about Sudafed - I've been told that keeping it locked up does no good because meth cookers figured out a way to recover the ingredient from their own urine. If THAT doesn't stop people from using it, no law can. Nothing short of locking them up will suffice, the other options being furnishing it at taxpayer expense or allowing them to continue funding their operation by stealing your stereo equipment.

 

[waggy]

Personally i feel that Prostitution and pot should be legal and taxed.

Have pot houses and brothels. but have all the women checked weekly. Make useing pot outside in public view against the law. so only used in the house and pot shops (like bars).

Now anything stronger then pot yeah keep against the law.

 

[Blackjack200]

Now anything stronger then pot yeah keep against the law.

What do you mean by "stronger"?

What about LSD?

 

[TechBoyJK]

What do you mean by "stronger"?

What about LSD?

making lsd is kind of like making moonshine.. it's not naturally grown (like pot) and it's easy to taint.

Kind of ashamed to admit, but I've taken LSD.. it was about ten years ago. Did it a few times, and really enjoyed it. However, I feel really stupid because I had no idea where it came from, who made it, how strong it was, etc. Just some guy going "1 for fun, 2 might be a bit much"

Totally dangerous and irresponsible on my part. And as much fun as it was, so many variables, un regulated variables, could have made my doses deadly. I think properly dosed and administered LSD is probably very safe, so if it were legalized, regulated, and I could get a dependable amount and be able to predict the effects, I might even do it again. Until then, no way.

 

[Amused]

Personally i feel that Prostitution and pot should be legal and taxed.

Have pot houses and brothels. but have all the women checked weekly. Make useing pot outside in public view against the law. so only used in the house and pot shops (like bars).

Now anything stronger then pot yeah keep against the law.

The very illegality of ANY substance, especially addictive ones, ONLY makes crime WORSE and does nothing to stem addiction rates.

Ask ANY person who is does not do drugs why they choose not to do drugs and not a single one will give you "because it's illegal" as their first, or even second answer. People abstain from drug use because of the HARM it causes. Illegality does NOTHING but fuel underground markets and enrich gangsters and smugglers. THEY are the ones that commit the vast majority of "drug related crimes."

As a teen, I did drugs. They were easier to get for kids then cigarettes and alcohol. Why did I stop? Because it was ruining my life. NOT because it was illegal.

Since illegality does not work, and only fuels more violent crime, why not shift the billions we spend on the "war on drugs" to education? Drug use ebbs and flows according to education and fads. Laws and crackdowns do NOTHING.

 

[MJinZ]

I'm Left and I agree. Drugs can be controlled, but not prohibited. Sex is already for sale in Nevada. But I'm pretty sure it's the States that ban these things, not the federal government, so this is a completely moot point.

As for sale of body parts, I think it is a point of pragmatism and ideals. It is pragmatic so people are not given further incentive to use one another for body parts, and idealistic so we don't treat other humans that way. There are also valid arguments like the fact that a rich person will get the kidney for sale while the poor one will not.

 

[Amused]

I also don't know how this makes any sense. I am "left" and I support legalization of prostitution, illicit substances, and even organ sale. Most of my "left" friends feel the same way (except on the organ sale thing, I'm pretty much the only person I know of that feels that way).

I imagine someone on the "right" would be much less likely to support legalized prostitution and drugs.

Many on the left support "for your own good" laws. Think harder and you'll be able to come up with a whole host of them. Your problem is you can't see that they're just as invasive and wrong because you support them.

You can get your clue from the article. Just look at the term "public welfare." I'll give you another hint: Seatbelt and helmet laws are two big ones.

 

[Blackjack200]

making lsd is kind of like making moonshine.. it's not naturally grown (like pot) and it's easy to taint.

Kind of ashamed to admit, but I've taken LSD.. it was about ten years ago. Did it a few times, and really enjoyed it. However, I feel really stupid because I had no idea where it came from, who made it, how strong it was, etc. Just some guy going "1 for fun, 2 might be a bit much"

Totally dangerous and irresponsible on my part. And as much fun as it was, so many variables, un regulated variables, could have made my doses deadly. I think properly dosed and administered LSD is probably very safe, so if it were legalized, regulated, and I could get a dependable amount and be able to predict the effects, I might even do it again. Until then, no way.

I agree. If your kids are someday going to try LSD, wouldn't you prefer they try actual LSD manufactured to pharmaceutical standards as opposed to some unknown hallucinogenic? As long as it is pure, LSD is considered non-toxic, so I think it's an obvious call along with pot.

 

[MJinZ]

Many on the left support "for your own good" laws. Think harder and you'll be able to come up with a whole host of them. Your problem is you can't see that they're just as invasive and wrong because you support them.

You can get your clue from the article. Just look at the term "public welfare." I'll give you another hint: Seatbelt and helmet laws are two big ones.

Seat belt laws are for ME not YOU. You can die in a crash for all I care.

Helmet laws - who cares? If you don't want to wear a helmet, fine with me.

 

[Amused]

Seat belt laws are for ME not YOU. You can die in a crash for all I care.

Helmet laws - who cares? If you don't want to wear a helmet, fine with me.

How is the government regulating MY safety a law for YOU? My refusal to wear a seatbelt in no directly valid way harms you.

 

[Blackjack200]

As for sale of body parts, I think it is a point of pragmatism and ideals. It is pragmatic so people are not given further incentive to use one another for body parts, and idealistic so we don't treat other humans that way. There are also valid arguments like the fact that a rich person will get the kidney for sale while the poor one will not.

I don't understand what you mean when you say "further incentive to use one another for body parts".

And the rich already get much better health care than the poor. This would not, btw, prevent people from donating organs or the use of cadaver organs, but it would increase the supply and theoretically actually made organs more affordable.

 

[Blackjack200]

How is the government regulating MY safety a law for YOU? My refusal to wear a seatbelt in no directly valid way harms you.

While I think it's crazy that people want to drive without seatbelts and ride without helmets; at the end of the day, I don't think that kind of behavior should be illegal. BTW, I can't defend how most or even some of the left feel. All I can tell you is that I consider myself left, and this is how I feel.

 

[Amused]

While I think it's crazy that people want to drive without seatbelts and ride without helmets; at the end of the day, I don't think that kind of behavior should be illegal. BTW, I can't defend how most or even some of the left feel. All I can tell you is that I consider myself left, and this is how I feel.

I don't think it's a very bright choice either. But I'm glad we agree. There is no valid reason for the government to maintain seatbelt or helmet laws.

 

[Linflas]

I don't think it's a very bright choice either. But I'm glad we agree. There is no valid reason for the government to maintain seatbelt or helmet laws.

But you know what their argument is to justify it: We all end up paying the cost of your poor decision. Of course that ignores the fact that they have taken this upon themselves without your consent and could be easily addressed by writing the insurance policy in a way that would penalize that choice. But is is always the justification they trot out whenever they pass some law restricting your behavior "for your own good".

 

[Amused]

But you know what their argument is to justify it: We all end up paying the cost of your poor decision. Of course that ignores the fact that they have taken this upon themselves without your consent and could be easily addressed by writing the insurance policy in a way that would penalize that choice. But is is always the justification they trot out whenever they pass some law restricting your behavior "for your own good".

Oh absolutely. "Cost to society" has been the left's end run around freedom argument for years now to get their public welfare laws passed.

Two arguments that are almost foolproof ways to take freedoms: "Cost to society" and "think of the children."

They have a new one now: Global Warming/Climate Change (As evidenced by Sandorski telling me I "have no right to incandescent light bulbs" when I complained about California's restrictions on them).

 

[Zebo]

I agree with all of that. Hell me and my poker buddies were discussing DUI being bullshit.. I mean you're not actually hurting anyone until you hit them and even then alcohol may not have played a factor.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

I doubt there is a country in the world where selling your organs is legal, even Red China.

Mostly because it cuts into their business.