Old 04-07-2013, 10:37 PM
  #62  
BigBuck22
Nontypical Buck
 
BigBuck22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,291
Default

Originally Posted by homers brother View Post
Careful now. You might make someone conclude that there's enough danger in drug abuse that it might NOT be such a fabulous idea to legalize their recreational use? After all, look at the problems in Russia?!
How did you come to that conclusion? Russia has a million+ people with HIV and other problems as a result of their policies.

"Until 2008, Sarang said, 80 percent of HIV infections were connected to intravenous drug use. “Now the main route is heterosexual transmission among drug users and their partners,” she said."

It's not costly to get them to use clean needles, you know.

Additionally, because they don’t legalize and give methadone to these addicts, and they suppress heroin supplies, they also have to deal with people using worse, homemade stuff like krokodil. One of the foremost fruits of prohibition is the substitution of inferior goods. Certainly no one would try to get high with what are basically poisons from bad drug sythesis like this "krokodil".

Actually, your response is precisely why I wouldn't support legalization. You and your like-minded thinkers would let someone choose to do something that might cause them and the rest of society serious problems, and then clamor for government to come in and rescue them. That old "forced charity" think, eh? How noble.
Do you drink alcoholic beverages?

“Russians consume about 18 liters of pure alcohol per person a year, more than twice the internationally recommended limit, a rate that President Dmitri A. Medvedev has called a “natural disaster.”

A male in Russia only has a 60 year life expectancy partly because one fifth of male deaths are related to alcohol from alcohol poisoning and car accidents. They also have to deal with all those babies born with fetal alcohol syndrome disorders.

That actually isn't how it is right now or a number of states wouldn't be seeing the introduction of legislation this session requiring drug testing to qualify for unemployment benefits, now would they?
While your state may require it now, it's not yet universal everywhere else.
You act as if the drug testing is free.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/us...ests.html?_r=0

We had a similar issue with fingerprinting for food stamps not being worthwhile.

Last edited by BigBuck22; 04-07-2013 at 10:40 PM.
BigBuck22 is offline