Explain to me why legalizing ALL drugs wouldn't work.
How would drug cartels be able to afford small armies if the product they sell suddenly went down in value by 95% and their competition up by 1000000%?
inb4 people would become junkies anyone who wants to be drugs, is on drugs plus I sincerely doubt that even mass rehab would be more expensive than the War on Drugs™
The opposite sure as fuck hasn't worked.
Because then I have to deal with drug addict shits on my sidewalk. Just kill them all.
Why would I sell you Oxys, ketamine, cocaine, heroin as a corporation, when you can turn around and sue me for ODing?
Have to regulate the market to protect business investment.
You COULD quit enforcing it as an illegal substance, but that would only increase illegal competition
yeah...and that's with billions spent on the drug war, it hasn't helped
how many new people would really start smoking meth if it were legal?
beyond that, what is the justification for even making drugs illegal in the first place? if I want to inject dirt into my veins, it's not illegal. cigarettes are toxic and those are legal
the government just wants as much control as possible, there is no other reason to make drugs illegal
>You COULD quit enforcing it as an illegal substance, but that would only increase illegal competition
easier to bring into the country = far less financial incentive to do it
if there's no risk, anyone can do it
it would bankrupt drug lords
Your american drug war is retarded and doing it wrong. It is cheap to shoot every addict.
>Because then I have to deal with drug addict shits on my sidewalk
Then get a better job so you can live in a nicer neighborhood
I do live in a nice neighbourhood. Legalizing drugs will make drug use as common as tobacco use which is common here. I have enough dealing with smoking faggots.
that's very seriously a better solution than what's currently being done
at least that addresses the issue in some way
>Claims to live in a nice neighborhood
>Complains about drug users
Something doesn't add up here. I thought you chinks were good at math
>inb4 people would become junkies anyone who wants to be drugs, is on drugs plus I sincerely doubt that even mass rehab would be more expensive than the War on Drugs™
but that's what would happen
people are fighting for their right to be fat disgusting whores, you think if we gave them free heroin they wouldn't take it?
thats the problem with this liberal atmosphere of endless criticism. I GET that the programs and systems we have now have flaws, but you think that getting rid of them is just gonna show how humans are naturally hard working responsible folks? you're a fucking moron
>if there's no risk,
You're going to become a distribution competitor of MS13 or Zetas?
How will that work out?
There would inevitably be more drug users, especially in public, were it to be legalised
you have a point but they wouldn't have even been created in the first place except by making drugs illegal
it would work like any other market, supply would be far easier and more plentiful without the risk of being arrested
it's hard for me to believe the amount of people smoking/injecting meth would increase just because the law is indifferent to it
Free heroin? No one said that. Legal heroin is already a thing basically with opiates along with methadone/suboxone.
Those that want drugs are already getting them, legalizing it would just allow it to be taxed and regulated and safe. Imagine if instead of going to a dealer to score drugs you go to CVS, talk to pharmacist, given clean needles and pamphlets on rehab/treatment programs. ODs would dramatically reduce because drugs would be regulated so you would know exactly what you're getting not some heroin mixed with fentanyl.
or we can kill the drug dealers, shut down the supply so no one gets it at all
It would work. It's a no-brainer. There are a few barriers to this, some political, some corporate, some cultural and some religious. But if those barriers were to be overcome and all drugs were legalized, and more money spent on prevention and rehabilitation, it would be a much better situation. The cost on society of failing to do this is huge. The cost of the law enforcement side of the war on drugs (especially in the US) is enormous buy only part of the total financial cost. Firstly, there is also the cost of drug addicts checking out of society, committing crimes (much more than would even be necessary to afford drugs without the hyperinflation of their value by criminalization), not working and paying taxes and recieving government benefits. Secondly, there is the cost of missed sales taxes and other taxes generated by legal drug businesses, as well as the cost of huge amounts of money being taken out of the regulated economy, and even out of the country.
On the other hand, one can argue that drug dealing provides opportunities for survival for the lowest classes of society. As long as you have a low class in your society, crime will exist because these classes do not fit in well in the legal economy, and tend not to enter succesfully into it. Without this underground economy to sustain some of the members of these lower classes, other forms of crime would likely skyrocket and they are often more violent or otherwise detrimental to society. You would rather have a somebody selling drugs on the corner of your street than somebody breaking into your house. Because of criminalization, a huge artificial value is added to drugs. There is an enormous cost of producing them out of sight, transporting them in small quantities through for example mules, fighting court cases, fighting other people involved in the drug trade and losing product to confiscation or robbery.
Cont.
>Explain to me why legalizing ALL drugs wouldn't work.
Define "work". Obligatory KYS
Cont.
By the end of the process from production to consumption, the value has increased so much that many people along the way have been able to make a profit from them before they are consumed. The drug addicts will buy them anyway and fuck up their lives, but for the dealers this is a good alternative to more violent crimes or crimes that would be harder to argue for as being victimless. The addicts are a sacrifice to the rest of the community this scenario. In the end they are the ones who give up all their money to provide for everyone else in the chain of the drug trade. This is no different from normal consumers of normal products, except for the the facts that the value of normal products is closer to their production cost, and many normal products are not a basic need like drugs are to addicts.
I personally think the first argument holds more water, but you need to eliminate poverty first or lower classes will resort to more violent and destructive forms of crime in the absence of a profitable drug trade. The financial benefits of legalization themselves would probably go quite a long way to eliminating poverty though.
or you can just kill all the dealers and destroy the supply
411
>All drugs were originally legal and unregulated
>Had an epidemic of users doing bad things in the 19th century
>Led to prohibition and end of problem by 1940
>1960's communist jews reintroduce drugs as culture
>Fucktard anons think that fat autist and niggers will behave better than white men at the turn of the last century
>MFW
Notmy experience with mj in CA
Why do you think people become dealers?
To make shekels
Like I said, kill the dealers. Along with that would come more jobs to put people out of poverty
Because the government makes more money doing deals with organized crime and the cartel. You dont actually think there is a real war on drugs do you?
How does that produce more jobs? What about all the families of the drug dealers that are supported by them? If people go broke they chimp out.
Btw my ID changed, left the house.
>what about the families supported by them
Created jobs would go as well to people in the family most likely, and welfare helps them out too.
What jobs? Where did they come from? Shaniqua with a tattoo in her neck is suddenly getting a nice job?
you think killing low level drug dealers does anything? Even cartel leaders? Of course it doesnt, Its supply and demand. There is a demand therefore there needs to be a supply. If the supply is illegal then you just give criminal organizations a monopoly on a billion dollar industry
yep and when its a billion dollar industry you know the feds are in the deal, silly goys
Niggers getting jobs? Oh no, niggers get deported. Only whites get jobs.
Not just low level, but every single one of them.
Also that's basically what they've been trying to do, except instead of killing them they lock them up. There is an added cpst to this, but it aims to achieve the the same thing as killing them, i.e. removing them from society and strangling the supply. It doesn't work, and it's very very expensive.
Cletus with a neck tattoo and 4 teeth is suddenly getting a nice job?
You will need a prescription from a doctor that tells you how much you can take a day based on your weight, age, height, etc. If you take more then the drug companies don't get sued for making you OD.
Also just to clarify, (((they))) know it doesn't work and that's exactly why they are doing it. They wanted to do it with alcohol too but alcohol was too popular and culturally accepted.
If Cletus is a pure blood European born in Canada (Or the Netherlands in your case) without a high risk of committing crime, then yes.
Problem is, a lot of them do have a high risk of comitting crime. A lot of us suffer from the same poverty, uneducation and anti social behavior that blacks do. Thesr aren't race-specific problems, they're just far more common in some races than others.
As long as there is demand, there will be someone willing to supply. You just increased the prices and made everything worse.
This. It's very simple, most of these are artificial problems, artificiallly making the whole situation complicated.
No. Explain to me why there are 4 legalize drugs slide threads right now you fucking kike
Oh btw, we have had legal weed for a very long time and we have fewer users than in the US. It's not about availability.
Bc you dumb shit, it's more profitable to keep the status quo. You want to destroy the freest market om earth? Pretty anti capitalist of you. There also exists another market that combats it, wanna destroy that too? Put tens of thousands of people out of work? Just let the state do state and shut the fuck up. It's 1000000000000% easier and more profitable for the state if they throw you away for 5 to 10 years, make sure you never get a job ever again, and gib you gibs. Stop trying to undermine mine their work! Help justify their spending you communist piece of shit!
A lot better than you think, actually.