Gun bans, drug bans etc.

Are just crap and false security for those who can't think with their own brains. Sure, people get shot and kill themselves with drugs, but so what? Tools and chemicals don't kill people it's always the people themselves who do that. When will we learn to accept natural fact of life that is death.

THE NATURAL STATE OF LIFE IS DEATH KILL YOURSELF NOW LOL

the thing is, stupid people on drugs with guns kill me, and that most certainly is my concern, the less drugs and the less guns they have, the less is the risk of me getting shot by a person on drugs with guns.

>>3
That's why you buy gun and protect yourself. Are you fucking pussy or something? I'm a goddamn crossdressing faggot who takes it pooper regularly and even I ain't that pussy.

Yay crossfire!

>>3
If we legalized drugs, I predict our murder rates would actually go down on average due to tougher prison sentencing due to greater availible space for prisoners in prisons, not to mention the end of violent turf wars and gang violence over drug disputes.

As for guns? Nearly all the evidence is stacked against you.  Gun control disarms the lawful.  The unlawful still get their guns, and then you have disarmed lawful people and armed unlawful people.  Most availible statistics show that the solutions offered by gun rights advocates work.  Castle doctrine laws, right to carry, etc, have all been shown to reduce crime when implimented.  In contrast, following the expiration of Clinton's gun ban, crime actually fell a few percentage points.     (The guns in clinton's ban were only used in a tiny percentage of crimes anyways, so the idea that it would have any huge crime-reducing effect is kindof absurd anyway.)  All it accomplished was a loss of freedom, and a false sense of security and satisfaction for gun control advocates like the brady bunch.

If we legalized drugs, I predict our murder rates would actually go down on average due to tougher prison sentencing due to greater availible space for prisoners in prisons, not to mention the end of violent turf wars and gang violence over drug disputes.
That's probably true. But will the effects on the populace of legalizing drugs offset these effects?

E.g.: people working while intoxicated, or learning nothing in university due to recreation. I'm not referring to individual responsibility here, but rather the collective influence on society.

>>7
"E.g.: people working while intoxicated,"

I don't think this would be that big a problem if drugs were legalized.  If they perform poorly enough on the job that it is likely to effect the rest of society, I would assume their manager/employer would notice and tell them to shape up or leave.  The manager/employer has every incentive to make sure his workers are productive to ensure he is getting his money's worth.

" or learning nothing in university due to recreation."

I don't think it is right to force people not to use drugs due to the possibility of them neglecting their work in order to engage in drug useage.  If you were to do this, would it logically follow that the government should ban video games to ensure that children develop their potential for the benefit of society rather than allowing them to spend their own time as they see fit? How about television? How about trashy novels? How about pornography? We could get rid of all recreation alltogether. 

Nothing logically follows, mate. It's all trade-offs. I really don't like false dichotomies.

Anyway, if many people take drugs recklessly, and therefore destroys their lives and futures, maybe it is in the interest of society to prevent it. That's a waste of human capital, and you're helping them too. People regularly engage in self-destructive behaviours, but that doesn't mean society should allow it.

The question was: is it in societies interest to allow it? Will the reduction of crime compensate for the loss of productivity? Or will there be a loss of productivity at all?

>>9
Those who do drugs are failures at life. I mean would you have started doing if they were legal? I sure wouldn't. I don't even drink, but I support people's freedom to destroy themselves. It helps to remove undesirables from society.

>>10
Yes. I am relatively succesful and I hardly drink (my last drink was a few beers some time in early december). Recently I even gave up caffeine because it interefered with my sleeping habits. Modern culture seems to think giving up and getting high is a good thing for some reason. People look at me as if being a stereotypical model citizen from the 50s is a bad thing. It isn't.

>>11
Hmm, you seem to live in bad neighborhood. Cause here where I live even drinking is not very socially acceptable. Drugs are out of question. Besides I think huge reason for drug popularity is lack of knowledge and the fact that it's banned. Rebellious youngsters are curious and they love doing something banned. Thus legalizing would cause people to see true effects of drugs and completely remove appeal of doing something "badass". Also if drugs were legal there probably would be safe(in terms of side-effects) drugs coming out from pharmaceutical companies.

>>4

i don't want to have to protect myself, even if you ask a libertarian they'll tell you that the ONLY purpose of the state is protecting it's citizens from harm (therefore the nick-name "night watcher state" to minimal-states such as those suggested by libertarians).


Yes, if the US legalized drugs alot more people would be out of prison, but there are several implications to it.
The US isn't the only country in the world, and most of the rest of the world doesn't really like drugs that much, so unless america could produce their own supply of drugs, they'd have to import it illegally or at least under heavy critique from other countries. If the US was to produce everything nationally, it would have to be heavily subsidized or there would quickly appear a black market undercutting the public market with drugs smuggled from low-cost countries.
You didn't start doing drugs, you're pretty smart, alot of people aren't as smart as you, and a large amount of drugs are addictive, thus there is alot of profit for companies to get people to do drugs, these companies will lobby/advertise in favor for people doing crack.
Now that's all right, it's the free market, problem for society is that alot of drug users isn't a desireable goal. Drugs generally affect the brain in a negative way, some of them increase risks of psychotic behaviour, others kill braincells, others simply makes brain cells dormant. I'm not talking about "ohh those nasty impure drugs mixed up with rat poison to make more pills", but the real, actual, pure drugs. Alot of other things affect the brain too and they aren't banned, chocolate, beer, cigarettes, coffee, tea. But the main reason for this is the short period of affect, and the fact that most of them, even if taken excessively, will 'only' cause physical harm to the user it self. There are of course divergences, drunk drivers, barfights, etc. but you rarely see someone sit in the street begging for money so he can get "just one more cup of coffee man, i just need one more! i gotta have it to make it through the day man!"


if gun control only disarms the lawful, it is due to inefficiency in the disarming/guntrol of guns, not due to gun control being evil. I'm not saying it should be allowed to have guns at all, or that a gun control program will reduce murder rates bombastically. I am, however, saying that i would prefer to live in a society where i wouldn't need to get a gun because i was afraid of other people with guns. I'd much rather not have a gun and be fairly sure that a robber etc. didn't have a gun either. But it is fairly unrealistic for it to ever be like that with the amount of guns in circulation, and with peoples love for guns/fear of not having them.

>>13
Should sucking on other people's assholes be illegal?

>>13
In the end it boils down to simple question: freedom or security?

There are three kinds of people, those who desire freedom, those who desire security and the majority who can't decide. Often a compromise between two is made. However we should always remember that no ban will ever remove people's motives and intentions.