Robbing banks being illegal stops people from doing it. Keeping drugs illegal does not. If robbing a bank was legal, I would do it. But there are very few people that don't do drugs solely because it's illegal.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

The reason things are illegal in the first place is because consequences follow when someone breaks the law, thus discouraging people from committing the crimes. People will always murder, but making murder illegal decreases its occurrence due to the risk of consequence. It's not about whether or not "people will do drugs anyway" its the fact that recreational drugs have been proven to cause harm to the human body and must therefore be discouraged. Even prescription drugs meant to help the body, when taken in large amounts cause harm. Whether people heed this discouragement is their prerogative. The reason recreational drugs are illegal and smoking is heavily discouraged is because they are harmful, regardless of how many people do it. Laws in essence exist to prevent harm of any shape or form. Any unnatural chemical that the human body does not normally process must be regulated. I understand our country is in a moral free fall right now, but can we at least not accelerate it?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

People have the right to cause harm to themselves, but when something has a strong potential to harm others, that's when it should be illegal.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

please explain the lack of morality involved in using marijuana?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

And it's unnaturalness...

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I don't smoke weed because it's illegal. I'd rather not risk my chances of getting arrested.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

The reason you don't smoke weed is because you're worried about getting arrested?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

facepalm.jpg (@anon)

by Anonymous 11 years ago

"People have the right to cause harm to themselves, but when something has a strong potential to harm others, that's when it should be illegal." The thing is, Joe Larson it does. Recreational drugs not only destroy the lives of the people who use them but also negatively affect the lives of their family and friends. A drunk may only harm himself when he's alone, but when you bring other people into the picture, and also put him in control of a car, there can be dire consequences. Think of the misery drug addicts cause people they are close to. Have you never thought about that? Also, I'm not talking about marijuana, I'm talking about synthetic recreational drugs like cocaine, heroine, and meth. That second anon was not me.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Not everyone who does drugs is addicted.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Right, and that totally makes it okay. Like how some smokers just do it at social gatherings. Recreational drugs are not like alcohol, you can't just consume it casually. They are very potent and are meant for you to come back for more. The majority of drug dealers' incomes often come from just a few of the same people.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

The only difference between alcohol and recreational drugs is that alcohol is legal.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

That's patently false, AtheisticMystic. Drugs are much more potent and has a stronger effect on your body in smaller amounts than alcohol. Of course in large amounts alcohol can do extensive damage too, that's why we have a legal limit. I know we all have our opinions but at least refrain from being intellectually dishonest. I'm an atheist too but atheism doesn't mean supporting lawlessness and having a disregard for the health of human society.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I thought you had a couple points until I got to those last few sentences. That was such a stupid remark that you've lost all credibility. Anyway, I just went back and read a couple of your previous comments. You can't use recreational drugs socially? That's just not true. I've seen it done.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I don't care about my "credibility," reality is still reality. People will do or say what they can to justify unhealthy dangerous practices, but it doesn't stop it from being unhealthy and dangerous. I also never said people don't do drugs socially. Of course they do. People ultimately make their own choices and have the choice to harm themselves, but unhealthy and dangerous practices ought to be discouraged to keep our society healthy and thriving, because a person's actions rarely ever just affect them. That's why potent drugs are illegal, we have a legal alcohol limit, and smoking has been banned in many public places. Name any instance in which *recreational* drug use has been *beneficial* to our society and you will have won this argument.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

The guy that came up with the idea of DNA was on acid when he discovered it.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Musicians and their great drug inspired music.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Like the beetles with lucy, along with pretty much every musician that ever lived

by Anonymous 11 years ago

"I believe drugs have done some good things for us. If you're against drugs, take all you're albums, all you're records and burn 'em. Those musicians who wrote those songs... rrrrrrrrrreaal fuckin high." -Bill Hicks

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Abortions. People do them anyway and they die. It should just be legal. Drinking. People still do it anyway, so the social stigma should be erased so alcohol isn't seen as something to get crazy on because it's no longer the forbidden fruit. This isn't very logical. And like AtheisticMystic said, robbing banks being illegal stops people from doing it. Keeping drugs illegal does not. Is this because of the comments on the post about how the drinking age in the states should be changed? Cuz if so the comparison isn't a fair one.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Just because it's a good idea to make something legal because people will do it doesn't mean that it applies to everything.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I like how many upvote this post has, yet that is one of the reasons people always use when saying abortion should not be illegal.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

If abortions were illegal, people would have to get them done (if necessary) in a really unsafe way that can put them in serious harm.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

that's an identical argument that is used with drugs.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

That's used in abortion arguments because making it illegal is clearly worse. Two people would get wounded/killed vs. the usual one.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

You misunderstand me. I support both

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Ok, but it makes no difference. People don't want abortion to be legal because "people are gonna do it anyway", but more like two people dead is worse than one.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

what i'm saying is drugs being illegal people get them done in even more dangerous and unsafe ways

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Yup, which is a reason I'm not against drugs. But for laws like murder laws, people are still going to murder anyway, but at least we'll catch/punish the ones who do. Also, the law doesn't cause //more// people getting hurt.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

This post is too vague for me to vote. I mean, yeah it's not the best argument, and if someone were trying to persuade another person that marijuana should be legalized, I'd advise them not to use it. But it really stems into many different types of illegal things, why people do them even though they're illegal, and whether those people think the acts should be made legal.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

It does make a lot of sense, though. The difference is that there's no demand for murder or robbing banks. There is a demand for drugs and abortion, so there will be a black market for it. Not only does this black market fund gangs, cartels, and other criminals, it makes the product or service more dangerous for the consumer.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Normally this argument is accompanied with said action being able to be regulated or made safer. For example, abortions would be done properly rather than by and incompetent doctor with terrible surgical conditions. Or drugs would be regulated so that they don't contain a ton of terrible stuff in them. Robbing banks and murder are issues that cannot be made safer or be regulated so this sort of argument does not apply to them.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

If the law in place does not have a high rate of prohibition, and is actually harmful to the commonwealth, then said law should not exist. It's pretty simple when you think about it. We have a law that prohibits murder, but this law does not lead to an increase in murders and is therefore acceptable as long as it is agreed that murder should be prohibited. Logic, I wish people would begin to use it.

by Anonymous 11 years ago