# So who the hell does support drug prohibition? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [November 10, 2012, 8:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-who-the-hell-does-support-drug-prohibition/640557 "2012-11-10T08:13:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![dimmy\_derko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/43a26b/32.png) [@dimmy\_derko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dimmy_derko)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2012, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-who-the-hell-does-support-drug-prohibition/640557/81 "2012-11-19T16:20:13Z")
> [@control-z](#): > > I could agree with you there, let’s rehabilitate instead of imprison. > > But I also think drugs are something you shouldn’t start on in the first place. Keeping them illegal will at least discourage the law-abiding potential abusers. Do you only restrain yourself from murdering, raping and robbing people because there are laws against it? Isn’t it possible that if it was made legal, after a period of increased use, there may come a period where it becomes so mainstream, all the cool kids will be the ones not taking it, and like tobacco use, it will start to decrease? ---
**Author:** ![solosam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@solosam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/solosam)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2012, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-who-the-hell-does-support-drug-prohibition/640557/82 "2012-11-19T16:34:02Z")
> [@](#): > > solosam, does the fact that these foodstuffs can, in the hands of intemperate people, lead to early death and debilitating diseases garner them the same moral contempt in your view? Should there be food police as well as narcotic squads? There is a profound and obvious difference between eating an unhealthy cheeseburger and deliberately injecting yourself with a narcotic toxin. I also already indicated my objections were based on a moralist rather than economic perspective. Please do not put words in my mouth, or subject my arguments to _reductio ad absurdum_. Also, eat healthy. It’s good for you. ---
**Author:** ![control-z](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/eada6e/32.png) [@control-z](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/control-z)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2012, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-who-the-hell-does-support-drug-prohibition/640557/83 "2012-11-19T17:16:01Z")
> [@dimmy\_derko](#): > > Do you only restrain yourself from murdering, raping and robbing people because there are laws against it? Well I refrain from seeing if my car will really go 150 MPH because it’s very against the law. And there are a few people I wouldn’t mind putting a little hurt on. So yes, I’d say laws help keep me in line. ---
**Author:** ![dimmy\_derko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/43a26b/32.png) [@dimmy\_derko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dimmy_derko)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2012, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-who-the-hell-does-support-drug-prohibition/640557/84 "2012-11-19T17:45:13Z")
> [@control-z](#): > > Well I refrain from seeing if my car will really go 150 MPH because it’s very against the law. And there are a few people I wouldn’t mind putting a little hurt on. So yes, I’d say laws help keep me in line. The reason I wouldn’t drive at 150mph anywhere but on a racetrack, is because it is extremely fucking dangeous on a public highway, even if your name is Lewis Hamilton. I don’t need laws to make me act rationally and in a manner that isn’t deliberately harmful to society. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2012, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-who-the-hell-does-support-drug-prohibition/640557/85 "2012-11-19T19:08:52Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > Some people just think freedom is a value worth working for, even dying for. All those people who think Bloomberg is out of line for banning large sodas should also be offended if the government bans use of a plant that some people enjoy. And those people who equate freedom with being able to do whatever you want no matter who it hurts are called anarchists, and are usually derided. And what plant are you talking about? Did you miss that this thread isn’t about marijuana? While some drugs are innocuous or beneficial, some have no redeeming value, are addictive, and actually cause problems for those who use and those who are around them. The latter need to remain illegal. Soda is not physically addictive, and the only harm is to those who consume it. That’s why Bloomberg’s law is offensive. There’s no legitimate state interest other than controlling the individual. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2012, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-who-the-hell-does-support-drug-prohibition/640557/86 "2012-11-19T19:40:25Z")
> [@grude](#): > > None, your local pharmacy in fact likely stocks methamphetamine under the brand name Desoxyn. Well, if it can’t be bought freely, I’m not sure how it’s any different from every other form of meth in the status quo. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2012, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-who-the-hell-does-support-drug-prohibition/640557/87 "2012-11-19T19:44:02Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > And those people who equate freedom with being able to do whatever you want no matter who it hurts are called anarchists, and are usually derided. And what plant are you talking about? Did you miss that this thread isn’t about marijuana? > > While some drugs are innocuous or beneficial, some have no redeeming value, are addictive, and actually cause problems for those who use and those who are around them. The latter need to remain illegal. > > Soda is not physically addictive, and the only harm is to those who consume it. That’s why Bloomberg’s law is offensive. There’s no legitimate state interest other than controlling the individual. I’m no anarchist, but I disagree. I do err on the side of freedom. Call me crazy. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2012, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-who-the-hell-does-support-drug-prohibition/640557/88 "2012-12-03T02:52:08Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > And those people who equate freedom with being able to do whatever you want no matter who it hurts are called anarchists, and are usually derided. And what plant are you talking about? Did you miss that this thread isn’t about marijuana? > > While some drugs are innocuous or beneficial, some have no redeeming value, are addictive, and actually cause problems for those who use and those who are around them. The latter need to remain illegal. First, you might want to ask an actual, self-described anarchist or two what they think freedom means, because that doesn’t sound like what I’ve heard. Second, there a number of plants, and fungi, that could be inserted into the discussion. Let’s say… coca, khat, and psilocybes. Heck, let’s say tobacco and grapes, too. Who are _you_ to judge how much ‘redeeming value’ any of these has to another person, to the point of criminalizing their personal, private consumption? If a ‘problem’ is caused for _someone else_… address _that_. Prosecute the drunk driver, or what have you. But keep your laws off the people who have done nothing to you or anyone else. It’s their lives, not yours. ---
**Author:** ![genuinejon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b3f665/32.png) [@genuinejon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/genuinejon)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2012, 6:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-who-the-hell-does-support-drug-prohibition/640557/89 "2012-12-03T06:33:55Z")
[Mexico Updates Death Toll in Drug War to 47,515, but Critics Dispute the Data](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/12/world/americas/mexico-updates-drug-war-death-toll-but-critics-dispute-data.html?_r=0) (since 2006, disputed as being too low) Those numbers are shocking and horrifying to me. I think that Bayer could safely supply currently illegal drugs with fewer murders. Also, not everyone is addicted to Starbucks even though it is widely available. ---
**Author:** ![Glazer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a88e57/32.png) [@Glazer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Glazer)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2012, 8:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-who-the-hell-does-support-drug-prohibition/640557/90 "2012-12-03T08:03:05Z")
Anyone who wants to use drugs can easily get them now. School kids can buy coke easier than they can buy beer. Innocent children are shot in gang wars and recruited in gangs to sell on the street. Users are afraid to seek help due to harsh penalties. Public officials are corrupted. Addicts commit more crime to pay for overpriced drugs. Criminal cartels have made our southern border a war zone. And all but run our southern neighbor. All the while becoming more rich and powerful. We have the highest incarceration rate of any first world nation. There is currently no regulation of the drug trade for any drugs. All because of prohibition. Decriminalization and legalization are the only way we will ever be able to control the flow of drugs, who can buy them, where they can be used and when they can be sold. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-who-the-hell-does-support-drug-prohibition/640557.md?page=4)