Would a regulation of narcotics rid us of drug and gang wars?

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
B/c of feminism, so what? The majority and history of the reason why it's illegal is because of social conservatives: Catholic and Protestant (Baptist) beliefs (Christianity). Feminism pales in comparison strictly on a numbers argument (but prevents libs from accepting it); social conservatives have been condemning it way before the feminist movement.

So liberals are against prostitution, but because conservatives were against it first it's still their fault?

You're a dipshit.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
B/c of feminism, so what? The majority and history of the reason why it's illegal is because of social conservatives: Catholic and Protestant (Baptist) beliefs (Christianity). Feminism pales in comparison strictly on a numbers argument (but prevents libs from accepting it); social conservatives have been condemning it way before the feminist movement.

So liberals are against prostitution, but because conservatives were against it first it's still their fault?

You're a dipshit.

Nice logic: it's obvious your reading comprehension is that of an ebola ridden monkey (/stooping down to your moronic level). Keep slinging the insults and I'll keep exposing you as a little baby. Or, you can keep reading if you want to grow up.

Layman's: Prostitution is considered taboo in this country because of social conservative values (i.e. Christianity), and hence not legalized/taxed like many other countries. Liberals don't subscribe to it because they subscribe to feminism which is contraposing to their ideals which dictate that females are not to be objectified. It's not a hard concept to understand. All in all, after another generation or two (socially progressive) we will probably legalize prostitution like Canada: highly regulate it by banning the negative aspects(brothels/pimps).

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
B/c of feminism, so what? The majority and history of the reason why it's illegal is because of social conservatives: Catholic and Protestant (Baptist) beliefs (Christianity). Feminism pales in comparison strictly on a numbers argument (but prevents libs from accepting it); social conservatives have been condemning it way before the feminist movement.

So liberals are against prostitution, but because conservatives were against it first it's still their fault?

You're a dipshit.

Nice logic: it's obvious your reading comprehension is that of an ebola ridden monkey (/stooping down to your moronic level). Keep slinging the insults and I'll keep exposing you as a little baby. Or, you can keep reading if you want to grow up.

Layman's: Prostitution is considered taboo in this country because of social conservative values (i.e. Christianity), and hence not legalized/taxed like many other countries. Liberals don't subscribe to it because they subscribe to feminism which is contraposing to their ideals which dictate that females are not to be objectified. It's not a hard concept to understand. All in all, after another generation or two (socially progressive) we will probably legalize prostitution like Canada: highly regulate it by banning the negative aspects(brothels/pimps).

You haven't exposed anything but your own partisan stupidity.

Yes, conservatives are against prostitution. So are liberals. Get over it.

Edit: And how do you legalize prostitution while maintaining brothels as illegal? Where do you expect prostitutes to work? It sure is easy to make you look dumb.

 

[CLite]

I would like to point out one thing, cocaine is not really a hard drug guys.

The rate of addiction is extremely low, a significant percentage of college kids experiment in it (I knew a shitload) and I think a study showed far less than 1% actually continued use post college. Compared to probably a far larger number of people continuing Marijuana use post college. Now I'm not saying Marijuana is additive... it is probably just more conducive to people's temperament post college.

I will admit that my Freshman year roomate got addicted to the shit, however he was also a massive alcoholic and a pot smoker so it's hard to paint his massive drop in grades to just Cocaine.

 

[Farang]

Originally posted by: CLite
I would like to point out one thing, cocaine is not really a hard drug guys.

The rate of addiction is extremely low, a significant percentage of college kids experiment in it (I knew a shitload) and I think a study showed far less than 1% actually continued use post college. Compared to probably a far larger number of people continuing Marijuana use post college. Now I'm not saying Marijuana is additive... it is probably just more conducive to people's temperament post college.

I will admit that my Freshman year roomate got addicted to the shit, however he was also a massive alcoholic and a pot smoker so it's hard to paint his massive drop in grades to just Cocaine.

I wonder how much the drug war effects those numbers, though. If cocaine was on store shelves I might have a problem with it, I might not, but a big reason I didn't use it more often was because it was overpriced and hard to get. I imagine a lot of college students who try it find it isn't worth $50 a gram and move on with their lives.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
B/c of feminism, so what? The majority and history of the reason why it's illegal is because of social conservatives: Catholic and Protestant (Baptist) beliefs (Christianity). Feminism pales in comparison strictly on a numbers argument (but prevents libs from accepting it); social conservatives have been condemning it way before the feminist movement.

So liberals are against prostitution, but because conservatives were against it first it's still their fault?

You're a dipshit.

Nice logic: it's obvious your reading comprehension is that of an ebola ridden monkey (/stooping down to your moronic level). Keep slinging the insults and I'll keep exposing you as a little baby. Or, you can keep reading if you want to grow up.

Layman's: Prostitution is considered taboo in this country because of social conservative values (i.e. Christianity), and hence not legalized/taxed like many other countries. Liberals don't subscribe to it because they subscribe to feminism which is contraposing to their ideals which dictate that females are not to be objectified. It's not a hard concept to understand. All in all, after another generation or two (socially progressive) we will probably legalize prostitution like Canada: highly regulate it by banning the negative aspects(brothels/pimps).

You haven't exposed anything but your own partisan stupidity.

Yes, conservatives are against prostitution. So are liberals. Get over it.

Edit: And how do you legalize prostitution while maintaining brothels as illegal? Where do you expect prostitutes to work? It sure is easy to make you look dumb.

Partisan, as in I'm not a Repug or Lib? What I say is fact. Feel free to refute why prostitution is illegal in this country vs others by providing solid evidence. It absolutely has its roots in social conservatism as well as feminism.

Although brothels are illegal in the majority of the European countries, many "massage parlors", "saunas", "spas", "clubs", "whiskerias" or similar businesses are in fact fronts for prostitution and opearate as brothels.

Basically it has to low key, and police cannot bust someone for having sex for money. They can't publically advertise it (no brothels), and women aren't exploited if you always ban pimping. They work as low key free agents and go off word of mouth or advertise under one of the fronts above (in Canada, escorts are pretty much synonymous with prostitution).

 

[Superrock]

If marajuana was legalized, the short term consequences are a large source of revenue and cost savings in terms of less prison sentences. The long term consequences would be a large increase in underage consumption(because of less percieved risk rather than availability) and a drop in school and work performance from irresponsible users. I think marajuana should be legalized mostly because of the cost to law enforcement and imprisonment but better safeguards need to be in place so limit the possible fallout from people who wouldn't use responsibly.

 

[Farang]

edited

 

[Eeezee]

For the last time, YES! Legal drugs = smaller black market = less reason for people to be violent over these things. Not only do the narcotics cost less to regulate than to prohibit, but they also bring in tax revenue and practically eliminate any black market related to them. There will always be small private growers/produces who evade taxes and regulation, but they are always a tiny minority.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Basically it has to low key, and police cannot bust someone for having sex for money. They can't publically advertise it (no brothels), and women aren't exploited if you always ban pimping. They work as low key free agents and go off word of mouth or advertise under one of the fronts above (in Canada, escorts are pretty much synonymous with prostitution).

So you think prostitution would be safer if the women had to stay under the radar and have sex with random guys in hidden locations? Do it at a licensed business and things can be kept regulated. Turning a blind eye to it is no better than trying to ban it.

 

[DefDC]

In the US, lobbyists will be lobbying hard to make sure pot stays illegal. The drug manufacturers sure as hell don't want competition from something every American can grow in a backyard garden or window box. Americans will always insist on being medicated. They won't care if it's from a pharmacy, dealer, or their own backyard.

I believe legalization of pot would drastically cut into the use of harder drugs, legal and illegal. Pot is very effective, and if it was easy and legal to obtain and grow yourself, many wouldn't need to bother with anything else. The legalization (or decriminalization) of pot would inject a huge influx of cash into the economy. People would be buying tons of gardening equipment, snacks, deep fryers... The music business might start to boom again... REAL music might start to thrive again...

Oddly enough, I don't even like the stuff. I did my share in college, but unlike alcohol, I'm a lightweight and get completely blasted, even on the weakest stuff. It's no fun for me. However, the criminalization of it is just absurd.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Basically it has to low key, and police cannot bust someone for having sex for money. They can't publically advertise it (no brothels), and women aren't exploited if you always ban pimping. They work as low key free agents and go off word of mouth or advertise under one of the fronts above (in Canada, escorts are pretty much synonymous with prostitution).

So you think prostitution would be safer if the women had to stay under the radar and have sex with random guys in hidden locations? Do it at a licensed business and things can be kept regulated. Turning a blind eye to it is no better than trying to ban it.

I agree, it would be better to just have them register at brothels, many countries do regulate:

In some countries prostitution is legal and regulated (see Regulated prostitution). In these countries prostitutes can be hired by a brothel, they must register, they have unions, they are protected under the workers protection laws, they must undergo regular health checks etc. The degree of regulation however varies very much by country (for example in Netherlands prostitutes are not required to undergo mandatory health checks). Such places include Germany, Austria, Hungary (see Prostitution in Europe), some Australian states and parts of Nevada. Curenly 8 out of Nevada's 16 counties have active brothels. Prostitution outside these brothels is illegal throughout the state. Prostitution is illegal in Las Vegas (and Clark County which contains its metropolitan area), in Reno (and Washoe County), in Carson City and in several other parts of the state (see Prostitution in Nevada).

The only problem is that modern Western views of morality won't let us go there yet (Nevada aside), so it's basically a baby step. Give the woman protections by banning pimps, then she can go to the cops if a pimp abuses her. And by banning brothels you don't upset the PC folks. In addition, I think in Canada they also make it a crime to solicit sex publically (like the ones who loiter/solicit in the street) to further satisfy to PC folks. It's win/win for all parties: PC folk don't have to see it in broad daylight and women are protected and not prosecuted for that lifestyle if that's what they choose.

 

[soccerballtux]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
No, they are going to exist unless we completely crack down on the crime NY style (giving the cops free reign for shooting if need be...this is the only thing that brought NY under control, people who say otherwise have no idea how bad it was there; I would know I lived there). If you legalize the drugs they will simply move to kidnapping.

Think it through, guys. These people are not going to up and say "oh jee, I can't make money selling hard narcotics anymore, I guess I'll go get a job." They've been in that lifestyle too long. No, they will start kidnapping your children and holding them ransom. Just think of the parents!

You bring up an interesting point. It's not like these losers will just go get a regular job if you took away thier drug selling - they would and do engage in other high profit criminal enterprise like extortion/kidnapping/murder for hire, etc - this is why I always say we desperately need to cull the heard of deadbeats and losers. No problem It's going to happen sooner than most think.

We could start by having real consequences for felonies. Jail is a playground. Watch cable all day, free food, work out at the gym, play basketball.
If you're bad, sit around in a room and just look forward to eating with your mates. The punishment needs to be more directly painful perhaps...