Oozy wrote

Aced wrote

Oozy wrote

Aced wrote Awful idea in my opinion

What is so bad about this?

I think that we need more explanation of what he really thinks. If he means that every person who deals drugs ranging any where from weed to flaka needs to be put to death, then I would agree that this is a bad idea. But for people who do deal crazy drugs like flaka, I do believe that they should be put to death. Even if Trump does want all drug dealers dead, I would be okay with that. If you commit crime, you can do the time your not worthy of tax payers dollars and should be put to death.

.

If you commit crime you should be put to death?
Well the thing is, our own government commits crime everyday and violates laws itself, ill just throw that out there but im sure you didnt mean to say that.
Whats wrong with this is we are putting people to death for selling drugs, when the person who is buying the drugs has a choice to buy the drugs, its not like hes forcing people to buy the drugs and shit. Secondly we should start buy punishing big pharma because they are apart of the opiate crisis.

I do not know how I feel about this anymore. I do not think that everyone who sells drugs should be put to death, but if that is what it takes to end the drug war, then I would be okay with it. But the big players in the game should definitely not just be put in prison. Some people are just not afraid of prison, in fact some people prefer to live in prison. If people knew that they could be put to death for certain crimes, then they might not do those crimes.

We have to stop the war on drugs or at least minimize it. Our current laws are not working. We need to make drastic changes. This could be done multiple ways.

I am pro-choice and I think that people should be able to do what they want as long as it does not affect anyone else. I think that is someone wants to do drugs, then they should be able to do them. I am more in favor of legalizing drugs and letting people do what ever they want. If they overdose then oh well, if they lose everything and ruin their life then that is fine with me, etc. But the major problem I see with this is too many people becoming addicted and messing up the economy.

Maybe putting people to death is a bit too far, but what I am trying to get at is that something should change.

the war on drugs was the worst thing to happen to drugs to start with.

Oozy wrote I do not know how I feel about this anymore.

There's an interesting part in Red Dragon where Hannibal Lecter says,

"We live in a primitive time - neither savage nor wise. Half measures are the curse of it. Any rational society would either kill me or give me my books."

We're no longer savage enough to stomach killing monsters, but not wise enough to control them either.

ProfessorNobody wrote

Oozy wrote I do not know how I feel about this anymore.

There's an interesting part in Red Dragon where Hannibal Lecter says,

"We live in a primitive time - neither savage nor wise. Half measures are the curse of it. Any rational society would either kill me or give me my books."

We're no longer savage enough to stomach killing monsters, but not wise enough to control them either.

When I said that, I meant that I really don't care what we do as long as we do something different that works. If you can not get criminals to quit committing crimes, then the only way to guarantee that they can not commit crimes is by putting them to death. Yes it is barbaric, but there is nothing else you can do. Some people will just not change. A lot of people think they live in a magical world where they can change peoples mind's, but that is not the case. There are many people who will not change their minds. For example, I am not going to change my overall opinion on gun rights and laws, that is just how I am. Many people hate the police, and they are not going to change their opinion. Many people think mass racism still exist. And many people who are addicted to drugs, can/will not change. If I was making tons of money selling drugs, then I would not want to change.

I think that people should be able to do drugs as long as nobody is negatively affected. If you want to occasionally smoke some weed and get high, then that is fine. But since too many people become addicted, I believe that the best thing to do is to ban drugs and heavily enforce strict and heavy punishments. The problem I have is when people get addicted to drugs and it ruins their life and/or impacts other peoples life's. This can lead to many things such as violent crime, homelessness, etc. I would like for drug addicts to get help, but it would just be better if they never got addicted or started using drugs in the first place. And since I want people to not do drugs, I would like these drugs to stop getting into peoples hands. So we need to stop drug traffickers, street dealers, doctors who over prescribe, etc.

The only way to stop these people is to increase penalties. As I have stated, there is no clear cut solution to this problem. And we should not just instantly put people to death for every little crime they commit. People should be given chances to change. If those people fail to change, then the only way to stop them from committing crime is putting them to death.

Once we get rid of the drug problem, we can focus on other things. Getting rid of drugs would cut the prison population in roughly half. The money that is spent on drugs would go back into the economy. More people would be contributing members of society. The list goes on and on.

If it works then so be it, drug causes a lot of things and endangers people's lives. As I said if it works then let him crack on

Don't see anything wrong with dealing drugs, its the people who take the drugs that cause harm to others and themselves by taking too much.

Seems completely illogical to me.

If someone wants to get their hands on a substance, they'll find a way. Especially if they're addicted and dependant on it. There'll always be dealers, no matter the punishment because some people are just desperate for fast money with little effort.

Less dealers just means less competition so higher prices, thus more violence for money to support their addictions.

Not to mention all the kids who are forced to deal drugs because of their upbringing and situation or are pressured into it from gangs, that's hardly their fault. Seems logical to execute a sixteen year old who's selling drugs to try and provide for his family.

Best situation would be to legalize drugs completely IMO. Those who were doing drugs anyway would be still be doing them, only they would be much cheaper and wouldn't need to commit crimes to get money since they'd cost so little. It's their body so let them do whatever they want to it.

And those of us who don't use drugs wouldn't be affected because we don't use them anyway.

Motivational wrote If someone wants to get their hands on a substance, they'll find a way. Especially if they're addicted and dependant on it. There'll always be dealers, no matter the punishment because some people are just desperate for fast money with little effort.

That is the case with everything. No matter what we do, there will always be some people do what we don't want them to do. But it will definitely stop some people.

Less dealers just means less competition so higher prices, thus more violence for money to support their addictions.

I would agree on higher prices, but that does not mean that overall violence will go up. It is very possible that users will commit more crime to feed their addiction, but it is also possible that many people will not be able to afford their addiction regardless of how much crime they commit. And then the violence between drug dealers would hopefully go down due to there being less of them.

Not to mention all the kids who are forced to deal drugs because of their upbringing and situation or are pressured into it from gangs, that's hardly their fault. Seems logical to execute a sixteen year old who's selling drugs to try and provide for his family.

Nobody is forced to do anything in life aside from pay taxes and die. There are people who will help others get out of the situation they are in. And if someone truly wants to provide for there family, then they should get a legit job. The drug game is risky, someone could provide for their family, or they could get caught and mess their family up even more.

Best situation would be to legalize drugs completely IMO. Those who were doing drugs anyway would be still be doing them, only they would be much cheaper and wouldn't need to commit crimes to get money since they'd cost so little. It's their body so let them do whatever they want to it.

Legalizing a majority of drugs would be a great idea. But just because drugs would become cheap, does not mean that everybody will be able to afford them. This would also lead to more addicts and less people contributing to society (aside from paying taxes).

And those of us who don't use drugs wouldn't be affected because we don't use them anyway.

Not true. I do not know anybody who starts using drugs and wants to get addicted. But addiction seems to happen to a large group of people. So that means that we will have many people who would have not been addicted prior to legalizing many drugs, who are now becoming addicted and as stated earlier becoming less of contributing members of society. So for example, a single mother who starts off with getting a little high here and there who becomes addicted and can no longer provide for her family. That is just one of many examples of why legalizing a majority of drugs could go wrong.

Visxal wrote Don't see anything wrong with dealing drugs, its the people who take the drugs that cause harm to others and themselves by taking too much.

The problem isn't that they sell the drugs, it's that they don't sell the drugs ethically.

For the most part, when you go to a pharmacy they will put you on a course of drugs which won't get you addicted and they won't give you any more until you finish that course assuming that you still need them. Drug dealers don't hold themselves to the same standard. They will give addicting substances to people who they know to be addicted because that's just part of the business to them.

If you can point out an ethical drug dealer who provides information pamphlets and clear instructions for use to avoid addiction when they sell their drugs and won't sell to people who they know to be addicted, but will instead offer them rehabilitation and therapy techniques, then you can make the argument that they aren't the problem.

ProfessorNobody wrote

Visxal wrote Don't see anything wrong with dealing drugs, its the people who take the drugs that cause harm to others and themselves by taking too much.

The problem isn't that they sell the drugs, it's that they don't sell the drugs ethically.

For the most part, when you go to a pharmacy they will put you on a course of drugs which won't get you addicted and they won't give you any more until you finish that course assuming that you still need them. Drug dealers don't hold themselves to the same standard. They will give addicting substances to people who they know to be addicted because that's just part of the business to them.

If you can point out an ethical drug dealer who provides information pamphlets and clear instructions for use to avoid addiction when they sell their drugs and won't sell to people who they know to be addicted, but will instead offer them rehabilitation and therapy techniques, then you can make the argument that they aren't the problem.

Actually BigPharmas are to blame for being apart of drug addiction.
Drug dealers dont provide information pamphlets and clear instructions because the person buying the drugs already knows the side effects and information plus i doubt providing pamphlets would help as when you buy a pack of cigarettes there is a clear warning on the front of the pack, however cigarettes are still purchased.

Aced wrote

ProfessorNobody wrote

Visxal wrote Don't see anything wrong with dealing drugs, its the people who take the drugs that cause harm to others and themselves by taking too much.

The problem isn't that they sell the drugs, it's that they don't sell the drugs ethically.

For the most part, when you go to a pharmacy they will put you on a course of drugs which won't get you addicted and they won't give you any more until you finish that course assuming that you still need them. Drug dealers don't hold themselves to the same standard. They will give addicting substances to people who they know to be addicted because that's just part of the business to them.

If you can point out an ethical drug dealer who provides information pamphlets and clear instructions for use to avoid addiction when they sell their drugs and won't sell to people who they know to be addicted, but will instead offer them rehabilitation and therapy techniques, then you can make the argument that they aren't the problem.

Actually BigPharmas are to blame for being apart of drug addiction.
Drug dealers dont provide information pamphlets and clear instructions because the person buying the drugs already knows the side effects and information plus i doubt providing pamphlets would help as when you buy a pack of cigarettes there is a clear warning on the front of the pack, however cigarettes are still purchased.

I said 'For the most part' because I know that some prescription pain medication can lead to addiction even when used properly.
And I didn't say that the warnings and pamphlets had to work as a deterrent of any kind, only that it makes the drug dealer as ethical as the legal standard, which is BigPharma.