Drugs: Prohibition, Decriminalization or Legalization?

正在查看此主题的用户

Wheem 说:
You'll get fired for going to work drunk, so why would you think it'd be allowable to go to work high if drugs were legalized?
The problem there is that most drugs take a fair while to be metabolised, hence you'd get people going to work without even realising they were high.
There's no such thing as a semi-automatic assault rifle - that's a contradiction in terms.
Erm, no it's not. All an assault rifle is defined as is a rifle with selective fire and a clip capacity above 10. It doesn't have to be automatic, and most armed forces actually utilise versions which don't have full auto capability.
 
Full auto is really only useful if you are in the swiss cheese business and you don't care about contaminating your product with bullet residue.
 
Archonsod 说:
The problem there is that most drugs take a fair while to be metabolised, hence you'd get people going to work without even realising they were high.
Even if the second part of this were true, how would it be any different from the current situation? It's not like drug use doesn't exist now, or that all drug users are unemployed. And in the case of Portugal, drug use has actually gone down since their decriminalization policy went into effect; one would would think that lower drug use would result in fewer people going to work high (which I'd argue is quite rare to begin with, and would/does result in job loss as soon as the person was/is caught being high at work).

Archonsod 说:
Erm, no it's not. All an assault rifle is defined as is a rifle with selective fire and a clip capacity above 10. It doesn't have to be automatic, and most armed forces actually utilise versions which don't have full auto capability.
A semi-automatic rifle does not have selective fire capability, ergo, it's not an assault rifle. And it's also not a requirement that any assault rifle use clips, since they all must have detachable magazines in order to fit the definition (yes, there is a difference between clips and magazines; the former feeds ammunition into the latter, which feeds ammunition into the chamber). Anyway, there's no requirement or restriction on magazine (or clip, for that matter) capacity for an assault rifle. There is, however, a cartridge size restriction, which means that a FAL (which was mentioned previously) isn't an assault rifle even if it does have selective fire (and the overwhelming majority of them for sale in the US, don't).
 
Reverend L. Lamb 说:
Legalise everything.

No, not just drugs, absolutely everything.

Probably a reliable way for humankind to commit suicide, but I guess that will be good for the environment.
 
Archonsod 说:
Erm, no it's not. All an assault rifle is defined as is a rifle with selective fire and a clip capacity above 10. It doesn't have to be automatic, and most armed forces actually utilise versions which don't have full auto capability.
No, and no. Selective fire means that it can fire both automatically (whether that's fully automatic or burst is irrelevant) and semi-automatically. Furthermore, magazine/clip size plays no part. Detachable magazine is a common distinguishing factor, though, as is an intermediate round, typically. There is no definite line between battle rifles and assault rifles.
 
I'd be damn well fine if they prohibited everything but alcohol. And keep pipes legal, just because they're awesome.
 
Ambalon 说:
I'd be damn well fine if they prohibited everything but alcohol. And keep pipes legal, just because they're awesome.

You know alcohol is actually quite a harmful drug compared to a lot of the substances that are banned?
 
K-64 说:
So? Trying to get it banned now would be... difficult.

Yes, I agree. I personally advocate legalisation/decriminalisation in regards to drugs. My point is that there's no real argument in favour of legalising alcohol and tobacco while banning everything else. The only reason that these substances are allowed is that they're "culturally acceptable" in Western countries, not to mention the massive corporate interests involved in their production.
 
Alcohol isn't as addictive, isn't as easy to OD on, etc. It has other problems, though. Tobacco could be outlawed for all I care.
 
Seff 说:
Alcohol isn't as addictive, isn't as easy to OD on, etc. It has other problems, though. Tobacco could be outlawed for all I care.
You can;t OD on Marijuana.
So it is safer than Alcohol and Nicotine. (A whole cig packs worth can kill you btw :lol:)
 
What's with the fixation on bans? These conversations always jump straight to banning. A ban isn't the only way to change behaviour.
 
Papa Lazarou 说:
What's with the fixation on bans? These conversations always jump straight to banning. A ban isn't the only way to change behaviour.
If anything it exagerates (stimulates perhaps?) it.
 
Seff 说:
Alcohol isn't as addictive, isn't as easy to OD on, etc. It has other problems, though. Tobacco could be outlawed for all I care.

Compared to what? Because compared to cannabis and some other drugs such as LSD or MDMA, alcohol is much easier to OD with.
 
Cocaine, heroin? I DO believe that it's a lot easier to take too much LSD than it is to drink the crazy amounts of alcohol it takes to make you OD on it. Same goes for popping pills, really.
 
Seff 说:
Cocaine, heroin? I DO believe that it's a lot easier to take too much LSD than it is to drink the crazy amounts of alcohol it takes to make you OD on it.
You can OD on alcohol quite easily.  :???:
Happens quite alot here.
 
Binge drinking is a sort of hobby for some folk. Plenty of kids around here too who drink themselves into a coma, which occassionally leads to death and whinging.
 
后退
顶部 底部