This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Should Cocaine Be Legal?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
160451
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
182246
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
172996
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
TheMediator
The problem once again is that if kids want to do it, they will. It would actually be better to have the gov't controlling its distribution than the underground market because it's easier to get it when it's not monitored. Kids have a rather hard time obtaining alcohol, unless their parents give it to them.
No. They won't. You need to get out of your black and white state of mind.
The big thing with kids right now is ecstacy. In Ontario, that's the big thing for middle and highschool children. It's not pot anymore, it's E. It's illegal but would you look at that, they're getting it. If they want cocaine, they will get it. They're not having huge parties with alcohol, but E.
Now, alcohol. How many kids do you see walking into LCBO and walk out with a 24? That's right, 0. How many adults do you see buying alcohol for kids when they offer money? There are a few, but not many.
Having it sold by the gov't would eliminate the underground market if they did it right. Since there is no underground market, kids would have a hard time getting it, just like tobacco and alcohol.
Maybe things are different in Canada, but in the US plenty of adults buy alcohol for kids, or at least they buy alcohol and don't mind their kids taking it and bringing it to parties.
The argument that someone who just wants to just try out cocaine will get it by any means necessary is complete bull*!@#, as is the argument that it'd be harder for minors to get if it were legal.
You're revolving on the same point, and it's been answered many times. You aren't causing more problems by making cocaine legal. If that person wants to abuse it, so be it. That was their decision. They were going to abuse it either way, whether or not it was legal except now, we get money from it rather than our current drug lords.
No it hasn't, making cocaine legal will cause plenty of problems for people. Crack addicts are much more violent than alcoholics.
Post by
Laihendi
Using those kinds of drugs destroys the lives of others as well. What if two parents get divorced, the dad gets custody of the kids, goes through hard times, and becomes a crack addict? The children shouldn't be exposed to that, but the mother can't sue for custody because what he's doing is legal.
I find it hard to believe that an addict would not neglect or abuse his or her children in a way that would allow child services to intervene. While it's not possible for current alcoholics to lose their children for alcoholism, they may lose their children for neglect or abuse as a result of alcoholism.
But at that point it's already too late. The children have been exposed to it.
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
149406
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
182246
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Laihendi
But at that point it's already too late. The children have been exposed to it.
That's how our consequential justice system works.
By making it a crime to even possess certain drugs, it makes it more difficult for children to be exposed to it.
Post by
MyTie
The money saved by causing the collapse of the black market and not having to fight the drug wars or patrol our borders as heavily would account for more than the initial investment costs. As far as finding investors? Uh... me. The profit margines would be HUGE. I'd do it in a heartbeat. Most logical investors would. The problem would be the reputation loss... MyTie's Cocaine. I really wouldn't want that stigma attatched to my name, because I really disagree with cocaine usage. Tough decision. However, if there is a profit to be made, which there would be, then there would be investors.
How would the investors get their money back if it then becomes government regulated? If something is government regulated, should they be the ones to fund it? I think there would be a lot of butting-of-the-heads between investors and government. Plus if there are multiple investors then that's even more people that want to have their say heard and also a lot more people to appease.
Think of the tobbacco industry.
Post by
124027
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
172996
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Again, legalization of cocaine wouldn't affect its rate of consumption as much as you would think. It would, however, debase the illegal trade thereof.
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
TheMediator
What irongolem said is pretty much the core of it.
Post by
172996
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Well... this thread is growing redundant. Same arguements over and over. After it cools off and starts sinking I'll make a new debate thread.
Thanks for joining me, everyone. It was a lot of fun. I'm glad to see randomness still has some spit and vinegar left in it.
Edit: Bye until the next thread...
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.