Prostitution and Drugs

[Avatar4321]

I have used every drug legal and illegal.

This explains so much.

 

[no1tovote4]

Individual drug related crime may decrease, but I doubt their habits would remain unaffected, same as their ability to hold a job. I'm not really referring to mild drugs such as pot or hash, just the hard stuff that causes radical physical and psychological changes in those who are addicted to them.

I think that the decrease in this type of crime would be slight, but it would still decrease. They would not have to rob as many people to get the amount of monies necessary to keep the habit. Some would be able to keep their jobs that otherwise would have lost them, not many surely, but some. Money spent on keeping these people in prison could be used for programs to decrease the use or to help in the addiction. Cops could spend more time actually putting away violent criminals for longer periods than putting on dangerous sting operations to catch those who otherwise would not be violent.

I personally can see a large amount of upside to decriminalizing drugs.

My point wasn't about gang related violence, it was mainly addressing individual drug related crimes. So, no argument here.

This would decrease significantly, those battles for turf would no longer be necessary. The more items we attempt to prohibit the more people will enter the black market. Clearly it is a topic for another thread though...

 

[sagegirl]

She said it was her female dogs name.



Continue.

Thats the truth....and she is a goofy fun loving lab mix and I love her dearly. I chose the name both for our love of life and for the thoughtfulness and experience that I reflect in my opinions.

 

[Avatar4321]

That's absurd, and the comparison is utterly baseless.


A

Why? Im making the same argument. We should legalize killing and stealing so we can regulate it and those who want to steal and kill are able to do so.

 

[hylandrdet]

My bet is that distribution (or more like control of the drug) after it is legalized
has already been discussed. Would it be a government run program or will private companies duke it out for franchise rights etc. I'd like to be a fly on the wall to hear some of those discussions--big business has already found out how to make bucks off of porn and I doubt they will let an addictive product just slip through their fingers.

Did anyone notice that the states are now adopting drug taxes? "Yeah, dude! I'm going to sell 1 mill in drugs, then pay my taxes!". The legalization of drugs is inevidable; is all about setting up a system in which the government can get their cut.

 

[dilloduck]

Did anyone notice that the states are now adopting drug taxes? "Yeah, dude! I'm going to sell 1 mill in drugs, then pay my taxes!". The legalization of drugs is inevidable; is all about setting up a system in which the government can get their cut.

NO doubt--taxation goes without saying----we love taxing addictive shit.

 

[no1tovote4]

Why? Im making the same argument. We should legalize killing and stealing so we can regulate it and those who want to steal and kill are able to do so.

The comparison is not clear...

Killing and stealing are actions in which a direct victim is present. If I kill you, there is a victim. If I choose to smoke a fattie (I wouldn't, but for the sake of argument we'll say it anyway) where is the direct victim?

It is a personal view of mine that laws should be made to protect people from victimizing others, not to protect people from themselves. Laws that are made to protect you because you might make a poor decision are a step beyond the power that government should have, IMO.

 

[Said1]

I think that the decrease in this type of crime would be slight, but it would still decrease. They would not have to rob as many people to get the amount of monies necessary to keep the habit. Some would be able to keep their jobs that otherwise would have lost them, not many surely, but some. Money spent on keeping these people in prison could be used for programs to decrease the use or to help in the addiction. Cops could spend more time actually putting away violent criminals for longer periods than putting on dangerous sting operations to catch those who otherwise would not be violent.

I personally can see a large amount of upside to decriminalizing drugs.

I can see the upside of decriminalizing pot, hash and other mild drugs, but not cocaine, heroine and other harder drugs. There is no study that has or could be done that would make me change mind. Ever.


Speaking of petty crime and addicts, you might find this funny. My ex bought a bicycle from this crack head one day. This butthead knew where we lived, and came back the next day and stole it back so he could re-sell it for crack.

This would decrease significantly, those battles for turf would no longer be necessary. The more items we attempt to prohibit the more people will enter the black market. Clearly it is a topic for another thread though...

I agree, just look at the black market for smokes and they're legal!

 

[CivilLiberty]

My bet is that distribution (or more like control of the drug) after it is legalized
has already been discussed. Would it be a government run program or will private companies duke it out for franchise rights etc. I'd like to be a fly on the wall to hear some of those discussions--big business has already found out how to make bucks off of porn and I doubt they will let an addictive product just slip through their fingers.

Here's my general feeling:

Marijuana should be regulated like beer and wine. With beer and wine, you can purchase it if of age, and you can make small quantities for personal use.

Harder recreational drugs (such as ecstasy, peyote, shrooms, acid) would be regulated like hard liquor - illegal to manufacture without a license, and greater listening requirements for distribution, and restriction on advertising,

And the very hardest drugs (i.e. the drugs with the highest physiological addiction rates, such as cocaine and heroin), would be regulated and distributed only by the government and directly to users. This distribution would seriously undercut, and virtually end, the black market for these drugs. This would greatly discourage the creation of new drug addicts. Because these substances would be available solely from the government, and at "cost", the black market would be destroyed.

The destruction of the black market means that "pushers" no longer have the present risk/reward factor for illicit distribution.



Thus, a 3 pronged approach, with varying levels of regulation is the appropriate solution.

Andy

 

[CivilLiberty]

Why? Im making the same argument. We should legalize killing and stealing so we can regulate it and those who want to steal and kill are able to do so.

No, you're NOT making the same argument - a person use marijuana in the privacy of their own home is NOT EVEN CLOSE to the same as a MURDERER.

That is an absurdity.


Andy

 

[sagegirl]

You dinged me for disagreeing with civil on the addiction of MJ...no wonder your name in here is sagegirl...a pesky weed in Nevada! :firing:

I kinda like that image, a pesky weed....ahhhhhhh..... you deserved the ding. Your response was so full of inaccuracies and generalizations that it was ridiculous. You have a biased opinion on this matter and there is plenty of rhetoric for it to chew on. This is a good place to state your opinion on things, (hey, we all have a bias or a slant ) BUT if your aim is to claim a fact you have to be able to back it up with reputable LINKS.
Kudos to CivilLiberty on this one.

 

[dilloduck]

Here's my general feeling:

Marijuana should be regulated like beer and wine. With beer and wine, you can purchase it if of age, and you can make small quantities for personal use.

Harder recreational drugs (such as ecstasy, peyote, shrooms, acid) would be regulated like hard liquor - illegal to manufacture without a license, and greater listening requirements for distribution, and restriction on advertising,

And the very hardest drugs (i.e. the drugs with the highest physiological addiction rates, such as cocaine and heroin), would be regulated and distributed only by the government and directly to users. This distribution would seriously undercut, and virtually end, the black market for these drugs. This would greatly discourage the creation of new drug addicts. Because these substances would be available solely from the government, and at "cost", the black market would be destroyed.

The destruction of the black market means that "pushers" no longer have the present risk/reward factor for illicit distribution.



Thus, a 3 pronged approach, with varying levels of regulation is the appropriate solution.

Andy

I'm sure big business and government are just licking thier chops at all the money they can get from people who want to get a buzz !!

 

[no1tovote4]

I'm sure big business and government are just licking thier chops at all the money they can get from people who want to get a buzz !!

My question is: Would it be better? Imagine Coca-Cola serving up a nice helping of drive-by shooting to get the CEO of Pepsi...or maybe Coors and Budweiser joining forces to root out territory with machine guns where they will have an enforced monopoly.

That is the kind of "competition" that we need to eliminate, that drug and tobacco as well as beer and alcohol providers would jump on the bandwagon doesn't change my opinion that the production of the drugs would be safer and in industrialized areas rather than in your next door neighbor's apartment. The sale would be regulated by the fact that the black market would be non-existent.

My personal experience:

I was able to get Marijuana or Cocaine far easier than beer when I was a teen. Other teens sold it in school and we knew who they were, so long as I had the money nobody would stop them from selling it to me based on regulations based on age. I think it would be more difficult for teens to get the drugs if they were regulated much like alcohol.

 

[007]

I think they should be legalized. What do you folks think?

Prostitution IS legal in Nevada... no big deal.

So what's the point?

 

[Powerman]

Prostitution IS legal in Nevada... no big deal.

So what's the point?

Nevada is one out of 50 states. Why are they ahead of the curve in this regard? What is this, Nazi Germany?

 

[manu1959]

Prostitution IS legal in Nevada... no big deal.

So what's the point?

not every county and not everywhere in every county...last i checked

 

[Powerman]

Why? Im making the same argument. We should legalize killing and stealing so we can regulate it and those who want to steal and kill are able to do so.

Stealing and killing are things that harm other people. Drugs and prostitution don't. Obviously you are fucking stupid so I don't even know why I'm giving such bullshit a response.

 

[Gunny]

Stealing and killing are things that harm other people. Drugs and prostitution don't. Obviously you are fucking stupid so I don't even know why I'm giving such bullshit a response.

Drugs and prostitution don't harm other people?

What color is YOUR sky, buddy?

 

[mattskramer]

Drugs and prostitution don't harm other people?

What color is YOUR sky, buddy?

Powerman is right. Under mutually informed consent, if I have sex with a prostitute, then the only people that might get hurt are the prostitute and myself. Yet, we agreed to take that risk. No one else gets hurt by the act in an of itself. The same goes for any drug transaction.

 

[Nuc]

Powerman is right. Under mutually informed consent, if I have sex with a prostitute, then the only people that might get hurt are the prostitute and myself. Yet, we agreed to take that risk. No one else gets hurt by the act in an of itself. The same goes for any drug transaction.

This assumes that the prostitute is a shrewd and calculating entrepeneur. Unfortunately many prostitutes are victims of thugs and gangsters on the outside, or drugs and poverty on the inside. Then if you visit the prostitute you may be supporting those factors. Particularly in Europe where the prostitutes are frequently slaves from Eastern Europe. Of course in Asia there is a thriving pedophilia trade. How can you say that's victimless? Prostitution has plenty of victims.