Criminalizing any drug just means gifting billions to organized crime and destroying the lives of millions of consumers by criminalizing them. Legalization and a focus on protection of minors, education about drugs, addiction prevention and rehab programs is what improves peoples lives. If you think criminalizing alcohol might be a good idea you should read about “The Prohibition” and how it made the american mafia the stinking rich empire it is.
What should be strictly criminalized is driving under any influence and that is the case in most countries.
Imo also driving cars in urban spaces should be criminalized but that is a different topic.
Generally speaking I agree with you. I was trying to highlight the simplified moral calculus on display that equates the immeasurable harm that strict prohibition has created to the potential harm of losing dozens of lives. Due to the inherent complications of these questions, neither is unequivocally good or bad, but they’re presented as a dichotomy that simply does not exist in reality.
There are plenty of other ways to go about it, just like we compromised on alcohol a century ago. As a society we agreed that it comes down to personal responsibility, so how is weed really any different? Pointing to the potential harm that legalization could cause while ignoring precedent and common sense is disingenuous at best and purposely misleading at worst.
Criminalizing any drug just means gifting billions to organized crime and destroying the lives of millions of consumers by criminalizing them. Legalization and a focus on protection of minors, education about drugs, addiction prevention and rehab programs is what improves peoples lives. If you think criminalizing alcohol might be a good idea you should read about “The Prohibition” and how it made the american mafia the stinking rich empire it is.
What should be strictly criminalized is driving under any influence and that is the case in most countries.
Imo also driving cars in urban spaces should be criminalized but that is a different topic.
Generally speaking I agree with you. I was trying to highlight the simplified moral calculus on display that equates the immeasurable harm that strict prohibition has created to the potential harm of losing dozens of lives. Due to the inherent complications of these questions, neither is unequivocally good or bad, but they’re presented as a dichotomy that simply does not exist in reality.
There are plenty of other ways to go about it, just like we compromised on alcohol a century ago. As a society we agreed that it comes down to personal responsibility, so how is weed really any different? Pointing to the potential harm that legalization could cause while ignoring precedent and common sense is disingenuous at best and purposely misleading at worst.