[tomjen3]

Its meaningless to decriminalize using it, since it does not give big benefit of replacing narco terrorists producers with pure, controlled stuff from legal pharma companies.

The world is obviously better of without drugs, but given that is not going to happen, the question to decide is: is the world better of with drugs from legal pharmacutical companies, or (somewhat) restricted access to drugs through an illegal system?

Decrimininalizing drug use is the worst of both worlds: you get more drug access, but it still happens through the illegal system and benefits narco terrorists.

If you don't want to put drug users in jail (you cannot reasonably fine homeless people), you can offer drug courts and diversionary programs.

You need the federal government to do what it did with Marijuana (which is still federally illegal), to be able to try the other choice.

[fc417fc802]

> The world is obviously better of without drugs,

You slip such a confident assertion in there seemingly without justification. Do you think (for example) that the world would be better off without alcohol? I certainly don't. Everything has downsides; that doesn't on its own justify eliminating it. It's analogous to the adage that the most secure computer is the one encased in a block of cement so as to render it entirely unusable.

[tomjen3]

I believe the world would be better of without alcohol for consumption, yes.

The only real benefits are not being the one outside the group, and the downsides include liver damage, social damage, massively higher risk for falling, drunk driving,...

More to the point, alcohol would never be permitted if it was invented today. Marijuana might.

[fc417fc802]

You left out the most important benefit IMO. People enjoy the effects it has. Instead you're making out like it serves no purpose.

> More to the point, alcohol would never be permitted if it was invented today. Marijuana might.

Isn't that circular reasoning? We know the world is better off without it because it would run afoul of the current regulatory regime. It would run afoul of the current regulatory regime because we know the world is better off without things like that.

[cyberpunk]

The world would unambiguously be better off without alcohol.

[CuriouslyC]

Tell me you have/had an alcoholic parent without telling me.

[cyberpunk]

Nope, parents didn’t drink either; but you do you.

Perhaps you’d be able to cope with life better if you weren’t so dependant on self medicating with harmful intoxicants and threatened by any statements against them.

[CuriouslyC]

You 100% have a religious or moral compulsion to make these comments. Just a heads up, it comes off as really assholish, and I'm guessing it's making your social interactions worse, unless you live in a monestary.