Columbia University professor, admitted heroin user, says legalization of all drugs is 'fundamental right'

[Criticalt]

Well you can say "you are incorrect" until you're blue in the face, but your "feelings" on the issue are irrelevant.

I never said anything about physical harm. If I steal your wallet, you are a victim. No physical harm needed.

We have laws for crimes against another because there are in fact victims involved. Robbery. Rape. Murder. Assault, etc.

Now, I open the floor to you. Please make a valid argument for why these drugs should be illegal (unlike, say alcohol which causes the exact same behaviors) WITHOUT, repeat, WITHOUT conflating a diffrient, already illegal act.

I know people that cannot control their sexual urges. Their libido is through the roof. They can NOT allow themselves access to porn as they will become addicted and that will move from the realm of fantasy to reality acting upon those urges. Sex addiction is a real thing because it leads to crimes like rape, assault etc. Ergo sex should not be legal.

No.

Now let's hear it.

I never said drugs should be illeal.
See, you cant even follow a simple conversation.

Porn and sex addiction are extremely common, far more common than chronic drug addiction. However, a very, very, very small number of people who watch porn, commit sex crimes.
As you can see, im talking about chronic drug users, and they almost 100% commit crimes SOLELY for the procurement of drugs. The people they victimize are called victims. Police actually call them "drug crimes" ........crimes have victims.

 

[Criticalt]

Drugs may be the catalyst, but they are not the cause.

The people doing those things are 100% responsible for their actions. Even if they would not have done them without the drugs, they are the ones who took the drugs.

They do not get to absolve themselves of guilt by blaming an inanimate object.

If someone drives drunk and kills an innocent family, it's the drunk drivers fault, not the alcohol.

Absolutely,
But, the drunk driver would not have killed the innocent family without the alcohol. DWIs are their own type of crime called "alcohol related crime", and the driver is charged with a more serious crime than just an accident.
And if you have ever read anything ive wrote on the topic, I would never say a junkie should be absolved, they should have a more serious penalty than a non drug invilved crime.....as they do.
As far as being responsible for their actions, of course they should be.
But with your logic, even if a guy wouldnt have killed someone unless they had the gun, they are the ones who used the gun.....and should be punished......because the caused a victim.
So, if someone steals something because they are on drugs......they are responsible and should be punished......because it caused a victim.
Im not saying what SHOULD be done, im saying what IS done......ask a cop if they arrest perps for commiting drug crimes where there is a victim.
To say drugs are a victimless crime is just goofy.

 

[Criticalt]

Is there a victim in that?

Is there a victim if a junkie steals a watch for the sole purpose of getting drugs?
Not your feelings.....as far as the real law is concerned.

 

[spat]

Is there a victim if a junkie steals a watch for the sole purpose of getting drugs?
Not your feelings.....as far as the real law is concerned.

There is a victim of the theft. Victimized by the thief.

That is the crime. Drugs cannot commit a crime, they lack the willpower.

 

[Darth]

Is there a victim if a junkie steals a watch for the sole purpose of getting drugs?
Not your feelings.....as far as the real law is concerned.

Yes. A victim of theft. Same as if they stole for any other reason.

 

[Darth]

I never said drugs should be illeal.
See, you cant even follow a simple conversation.

Porn and sex addiction are extremely common, far more common than chronic drug addiction. However, a very, very, very small number of people who watch porn, commit sex crimes.
As you can see, im talking about chronic drug users, and they almost 100% commit crimes SOLELY for the procurement of drugs. The people they victimize are called victims. Police actually call them "drug crimes" ........crimes have victims.

So that would be a "no" to reasons for drugs to be illegal?

 

[spat]

Absolutely,
But, the drunk driver would not have killed the innocent family without the alcohol. DWIs are their own type of crime called "alcohol related crime", and the driver is charged with a more serious crime than just an accident.
And if you have ever read anything ive wrote on the topic, I would never say a junkie should be absolved, they should have a more serious penalty than a non drug invilved crime.....as they do.
As far as being responsible for their actions, of course they should be.
But with your logic, even if a guy wouldnt have killed someone unless they had the gun, they are the ones who used the gun.....and should be punished......because the caused a victim.
So, if someone steals something because they are on drugs......they are responsible and should be punished......because it caused a victim.
Im not saying what SHOULD be done, im saying what IS done......ask a cop if they arrest perps for commiting drug crimes where there is a victim.
To say drugs are a victimless crime is just goofy.

Drug use *is* a victimless crime. Just because drug users sometimes commit non-victimless crimes is irrelevant. Even if the drugs lead them to do it.

Stealing something has a victim. Snorting something doesn't. Just because one sometimes leads to the other doesn't mean you can connect them in the way you are trying.



That's like saying the armed robber wouldn't have committed the crime if he didn't have the gun.

It's just wrong. The robber is guilty, the gun cannot commit a crime, it has no free will.

The only thing that can ever be "responsible" for an action is the *person making the decision* to commit it.

No free will = no responsibility.

 

[spat]

Is there a victim if a junkie steals a watch for the sole purpose of getting drugs?
Not your feelings.....as far as the real law is concerned.

If the watch was stolen to pay for something other than drugs, should we blame that too ?

If they guy steals the watch to buy video games, do we blame Nintendo ?

 

[Grimscale]

Is there a victim in that?

So you are, in effect, arguing that CGI-based pedophilia pictures and video should be legal, since there is no actual victim.

 

[spat]

So you are, in effect, arguing that CGI-based pedophilia pictures and video should be legal, since there is no actual victim.

There's lots of cartoon stuff out there that certainly qualifies.

How accurate can the drawing be before it becomes illegal ?

What do you do when the animator says "she's 18, she just looks young" ? It's not like a fictional character has a birth certificate you can check.

What if they get a 23 year old actress and just dress her up like a schoolgirl ? Is that illegal ? It's sure as hell common. It's practically a career path for some of them.

No, that's opening up a very dangerous can of worms indeed.

 

[Darth]

So you are, in effect, arguing that CGI-based pedophilia pictures and video should be legal, since there is no actual victim.

I have no idea where in the world you pulled that from, but presented that invented scenario, sure.

 

[Grimscale]

No, that's opening up a very dangerous can of worms indeed.

Ironically, there have been studies that suggest access to pedo pictures and video actually REDUCE the likelihood that someone would harm an actual child.
But, because the topic is so anathema, they aren't permitted to continue these studies.

I remember a news article about a man arrested for "possessing child porn" as he came back into the U.S. from Canada for simply having Anime.
The argument that all forms should be outlawed was to reduce the chance that an actual underage person is harmed, and it is explained away as "they were really 18+ and only looked young". But when you outlaw hand-drawn (or computer drawn) images, where it is fairly obvious that no real human was harmed, you start to cross the line between "thought crime" and real crime.
This super-restrictive method also ends up harming nudist families. They end up arrested just for having family pictures, where there is no actual sexual situations depicted, simply because they have pictures of their own children on vacation.


**I had to do a lot of research on this topic for my previous job, as I was the main administrator of the "abuse" email.

 

[Grimscale]

but presented that invented scenario

Not really "invented", since people are already arrested for cartoons that are labeled "child porn". (see my post above)

 

[Saltwater60]

Is there a victim in that?

Yes and there are many victims in drug use. The people that overdose, the people who watch loved ones die, the people who die in car accidents because driving while high, the people who get robbed, beaten, and shot to get money for a fix.

This article says about 21% of all crimes committed are because of drug use and addiction. I think was call those people victims of a crime. Will making drugs legal increase this? I’d say it’s likely. How much I have no clue.

BJS report: Drug abuse and addiction at the root of 21% of crimes

A new Bureau of Justice report released yesterday reveals that 21% of sentenced people in state prisons and local jails are incarcerated for crimes committed ...

www.prisonpolicy.org

 

[Saltwater60]

Emotions don't outweigh rights.

Do you think it's a good idea to have your kids drink drain cleaner?

Is that a law based decision?

This loss is not why I think drugs should be illegal. I’ve thought they should be illegal for as long as I can remember.

 

[spat]

Yes and there are many victims in drug use. The people that overdose, the people who watch loved ones die, the people who die in car accidents because driving while high, the people who get robbed, beaten, and shot to get money for a fix.

This article says about 21% of all crimes committed are because of drug use and addiction. I think was call those people victims of a crime. Will making drugs legal increase this? I’d say it’s likely. How much I have no clue.

BJS report: Drug abuse and addiction at the root of 21% of crimes

A new Bureau of Justice report released yesterday reveals that 21% of sentenced people in state prisons and local jails are incarcerated for crimes committed ...

www.prisonpolicy.org

None of those are victims of drug use.

Those are victims of drug users.

Why do you look at drugs differently than all the other motives for crimes ?

All the people who die in car accidents related to alcohol use are different than other drugs how ?

The people who get robbed, beaten and shot to get money for other stuff ?

 

[Darth]

Yes and there are many victims in drug use. The people that overdose, the people who watch loved ones die, the people who die in car accidents because driving while high, the people who get robbed, beaten, and shot to get money for a fix.

This article says about 21% of all crimes committed are because of drug use and addiction. I think was call those people victims of a crime. Will making drugs legal increase this? I’d say it’s likely. How much I have no clue.

BJS report: Drug abuse and addiction at the root of 21% of crimes

A new Bureau of Justice report released yesterday reveals that 21% of sentenced people in state prisons and local jails are incarcerated for crimes committed ...

www.prisonpolicy.org

Ok, now see the part where I mention "without conflating separate, already illegal crimes involving victims."

Nobody has done that yet.

 

[Darth]

Not really "invented", since people are already arrested for cartoons that are labeled "child porn". (see my post above)

You invented this scenario however.

 

[Darth]

None of those are victims of drug use.

Those are victims of drug users.

Why do you look at drugs differently than all the other motives for crimes ?

All the people who die in car accidents related to alcohol use are different than other drugs how ?

The people who get robbed, beaten and shot to get money for other stuff ?

Its intellectual dishonesty.

They have fallen for the propaganda as to why drugs are illegal. When the flaw is pointed out they HAVE to conflate separate things or the argument fails.

 

[Grimscale]

You invented this scenario however.

I didn't invent the scenario where the guy coming in from Canada was arrested for having anime and they called it child porn.
Did you miss that part of my previous statement, or do you not know what anime is?

 

[crunchberry]

Already it seems like he uses more heroin than he earlier admitted. Can't wait to watch his downfall, he becomes a homeless street pastor with no teeth, who wants to educate kids on the dangers of drugs and learn from his experience.

This guy's head is so far up his own ass he thinks all these ideas he has about drugs are groundbreaking and he is so responsible hard drugs are harmless to him.

 

[Robin]

Balance, and imbalanced, therein lies the rub.
Robin

 

[Darth]

I didn't invent the scenario where the guy coming in from Canada was arrested for having anime and they called it child porn.
Did you miss that part of my previous statement, or do you not know what anime is?

*no discussion of child porn in this thread thus far*

Then:

So you are, in effect, arguing that CGI-based pedophilia pictures and video should be legal, since there is no actual victim.

So again, I'm this scenario you invented here, yes, it should be legal.

Had you said "in reference to this one case in Canada", different story.

I, of all people, am aware of what anime and Hentai is...

 

[drowhawk]

Same happened to a guy I worked with.
All I have to say is at least if it’s illegal I can tell my kids that and tell them that’s how bad they are.
A young beautiful girl I loved dearly lost her life from this junk. She came from a good family and was prescribed this shit for growing pains. Got hooked then switched to heroin. Was clean for 18 months then went back to it one time and overdosed. She died that night. If she wasn’t a drug addict a good chance she would be my wife. Nicest girl with the most beautiful eyes and nicest smile you have ever seen. I truly loved her and this junk took her and many more. I can’t support legalizing it. Sorry.

That's terrible. I'm so sorry to hear that you witnessed that.

Unfortunately you literally just made the point that the drug being illegal did nothing to stop her death. If anything, you've furthered the argument that the "legal drugs" being prescribed by "legal drug dealers" are the ones we need to worry about; not the illegal drugs.

 

[drowhawk]

If being a drug addict makes your family a victim, then my mother voting for Biden makes me a victim.

 

[spat]

If being a drug addict makes your family a victim, then my mother voting for Biden makes me a victim.

Well, that second point, I think it kinda does....

 

[Saltwater60]

If being a drug addict makes your family a victim, then my mother voting for Biden makes me a victim.

Drug addicts routinely do bad things to family member’s like theft and violence. I’m sorry your mom voted for Biden and that will lead to theft of your wages so yes you are a victim.

 

[Saltwater60]

That's terrible. I'm so sorry to hear that you witnessed that.

Unfortunately you literally just made the point that the drug being illegal did nothing to stop her death. If anything, you've furthered the argument that the "legal drugs" being prescribed by "legal drug dealers" are the ones we need to worry about; not the illegal drugs.

An argument can be made either way. I could truly give a shit less what they do. I hope they make hard drugs legal and enough liberals overdose we can take back the government. If they do though drug addicts should get no help at all since the government approved their drug abuse. I don’t want a fucking penny of tax going to their aid or recovery. They live or die on their own. No paramedics, narcan, or hospital help. This will not stop the illegal drug trade just like legalizing weed failed at that.

 

[spat]

An argument can be made either way. I could truly give a shit less what they do. I hope they make hard drugs legal and enough liberals overdose we can take back the government. If they do though drug addicts should get no help at all since the government approved their drug abuse. I don’t want a fucking penny of tax going to their aid or recovery. They live or die on their own. No paramedics, narcan, or hospital help. This will not stop the illegal drug trade just like legalizing weed failed at that.

They legalized weed, but they overtax it badly enough that it still supports a black market.

Ultimate fail.

They're starting to tax tobacco enough that it's getting a black market (and the associated crime) too.

 

[tirwin1]

They legalized weed, but they overtax it badly enough that it still supports a black market.

Ultimate fail.

They're starting to tax tobacco enough that it's getting a black market (and the associated crime) too.

Not starting. There has been a black market for at least a decade in this state. A relative of mine was in the ny state troopers and they were investigating black market sales of cigarettes that long ago.