Show one stat that shows that prohibition does anything other than create a criminal class out of otherwise law-abiding citizens (users), and concentrate wealth among a select few (traffickers and the politicians/judges they buy) at the expense of the broader citizenry.

Go on, let's fucking see it. More people aren't drinking than would drink without prohibition. More people aren't smoking pot than would smoke pot without prohibition. Instead, more people are competing to provide a higher quality, safer product, and more people are profiting.

The drug war is about concentrating power and wealth, and doesn't have fuck all to do with health or safety. And concentrating "safe sites" near high class, high value property is DESIGNED to bring drug-related crime to those areas, to drive down property value and cause those property owners to sell, so that megacorporations like Blackrock can snag up the land and continue turning the next generation into perpetual fucking renters, because companies like blackrock pay the "public servants" you elect more than you do.

Which part of all of this is not obvious?

+1 Very well said

Who cares about the money if less people can possess and consume drugs? That was the original goal.

The rich drug lords would probably be rich anyway smuggling avocados or something.

Why should anyone dictate what you can or can not put in your body? I don't give a fuck if some junkie wants to be a junkie. What I want is for that junkie to hold a paying job that will provide them the income so that they can go down to the drugstore and provide them their poison of choice. And I want that poison of choice to be what it's supposed to be, rather than a mix of deadly chemicals and fentanyl.

It's so fucking sad that we legalize the ability to murder children because "my body my choice" yet then try to dictate "what you put in your body" as some form of moral high ground. How about this: People use drugs. People have ALWAYS used drugs. Throughout all of history, humans have used drugs. It's a thing that has never gone away, and never will. Rather than turning people who're behaving perfectly natural into criminals, why don't we simply regulate those drugs to keep them as safe as humanly possible, prevent the active advertisement and promotion of them as some "good thing" and call it good?

All of this heavy handed dictator shit CAUSES the problem, doesn't resolve it.

It already is legal here - this thread is about "safe consumption sites", it's 100% legal to use wherever you want here in BC

and the reason they want to bring in these sites is specifically because so many 100% legal users are dying of overdose in random locations.

This post was edited by El1te on Feb 14 2024 09:11pm

The initiatives had the opposite effect - after legalization, overdoses have only been going up and up which is the only reason anyone is talking about safe injection sites in the first place.

Truly a bizarre world we live in

We can't do that unless we get rid of the welfare state.

And that will never happen so meh.

Can you point out which heavy handed dictator shit (Phillipines, Singapore, pick your drug-free zero-overdose country) led to mass overdoses, families being destroyed en masse, causing a group of people to believe in the establishment of "safe consumption sites"?

None, because it's frankly common sense that if you outlaw drugs and initiate a legitimate crackdown on supply then the drug problem goes away.

Just look at my home province of BC for the statistics you crave that legalization of hard drugs fixes the problem that we're talking about in the first place

I fail to see the correlation. People already use welfare funds to purchase drugs. And when those drugs are off the street, often they contain lethal doses of fentanyl, and people die.

How would simple legalization and regulation, and businesses selling "safe", uncut, unspiked version of those drugs be prevented or even impacted by the welfare state?

If anything, having drugs legalized outright would be of benefit. Why should burger flippers and cashiers and shelf stockers be prevented from obtaining employment due to recreational drug use? Why should they have to take drug tests at all, unless they're actively showing up to work inebriated on whatever to the point they cannot carry out their job duties? Seems to me that recreational use of drugs being illegal to the point where people cannot obtain jobs because they're using them is causing more people to rely on welfare. Which they then turn around and spend on unsafe and illegal drugs. Vicious circle.



Over 100,000 people in the US died in 2023 from Fentanyl poisoning, because our heavy handed dictatorship laws against drugs led otherwise law abiding citizens to use what they THOUGHT was one thing, but was REALLY poison.

It's NOT common sense that drug use ends when it's outlawed. If that were the case, there would be no drug problem in the US. How boneheaded can you be?

This post was edited by InsaneBobb on Feb 14 2024 09:34pm

I don't do drugs

Virtually none of my friends do drugs

What kind of degenerates are you hanging out with?

Ok I've tried pot and edibles in college but that doesn't count