 | | Re: Should recreational drugs be illegal?
|
|
(...) was (...) Thats AU$. At $7 a pack, that's about 2 packs a day each, though he was smoking more than she was. Not hard for chain smokers. Tobacco is addictive. If you become addicted it's hard to stop even when you have no (other) need for it. (...) (23 years ago, 7-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: If you oppose drug legalization, you support terrorism!
|
|
(...) Disagree that the US "doesn't" produce raw goods? Or disagree that there isn't enough for the planet to share the US/Canada/Aus/Euro/etc standard of living? (...) Maggie's point being (I think) that the US doesn't produce enough to sustain (...) (23 years ago, 6-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: If you oppose drug legalization, you support terrorism! (the stigma)
|
|
What exactly *is* the harm in legalizing narcotics? Some people will certainly abuse them, regardless of the law. Some people will also die from them. But people die from all manner of things daily, so why should narcotics be considered some (...) (23 years ago, 6-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: If you oppose drug legalization, you support terrorism!
|
|
(...) I disagree. Every nation produces raw goods at some level. I'm more worried about large corporations, such as Mansanto in Canada, monopolizing those raw materials/goods just because they've created and patented the means to produce artificial (...) (23 years ago, 6-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: If you oppose drug legalization, you support terrorism!
|
|
(...) Heh-- I brought that up in the other corner of the thread :) Threatening to the US? Potentially. Good(TM)? I dunno. Depends on who for, as usual :) (...) Sad but true. I'm not against them producing raw goods, but it seems that: 1. "3rd world" (...) (23 years ago, 6-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
