|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 8:52 pm
kind wench EsgarBlackpoxs Well, I'd still call drug users victims. Regardless of whether they made the choice or not, they're still a victim. And they can't put you in jail for commiting suicide. You're dead. Kind of takes the air out from under teh penitentiary systems wings. for many people living in urban society, dealing drugs and prostituting is very common and i don't see the harm in it. If you make bad decisions about how you treat your body and spend your money (or earn your living) why does the government care? I think it's a hindrance to free will. So, you would accept infants drinking, say, bleach? Or teenagers doing that? I don't see the harm in prostitution (unless they have STD's), but my issue with drugs is that they can really destroy lives because of their addictive nature. I have a problem when kids in elementary/middle school are being arrested on drug charges.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 9:31 pm
~HomicidalTendencies~ The Tragic Mime kind wench ~HomicidalTendencies~ No, I don't think victimless criminals should go to prison.
Honostly, I think it's a waste of prison space. And for that matter, it's a waste of police and judicial efforts.
They're wasting their time dealing with minor drug offenders, prostitutes, and vandals when they could be using our tax dollars to put real criminals behind bars. Murders, rapists, child molesters, all going unnoticed because the cops are dealing with some pothead.
In particular, I don't think druggies should get jail time. They should go to rehab and learn to become a useful citizen, dumping them in jail won't do a thing of good if they can't get better. <3 If I want to be a pothead and I'm not hurting anyone but possibly myself, why is that anyone's business? why would they need to waste any time or resources on rehab for me? But the thing is, doing drugs doesnt affect just you. It affects family, friends, anybody who's close to you.
Hence, the reason they go to rehab. It would be much better for them to go to a helpful place where they can recover from an addiction. That way when they are released they can go back to their family and friends a new person, not the same old drug addict that got arrested once and probably will again if not helped.
<3 Yeah, I guess you're right, but not everyone goes to rehab.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 10:29 pm
You're making yourself a victim in the case of prostitution, and the main victim in the case of drugs. If anything, the drug dealers should at least try to hide or do something so they're not out in public, because I'm sure some mothers wouldn't want their kids to know about drugs at such early ages. I think that drugs shouldn't be illegal anyway, it's a pretty stupid rule, you're the one destroying your body, why should the government care? You're just a number to them. Again with prostitution. You're the one putting yourself at risk of an STD, so why should the government care?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:05 pm
Victim - n.
a person who suffers from a destructive or injurious action or agency
Drug users suffer from the destructive effects of intaking drugs.
Other than that, I agree that Junkies should be placed into rehab, not jail.
Actually, I think that people who use Marijuana intelligently should be ignored by the Gov't entirely, but putting a system to practice this into motion would be painfully difficult.
You don't really suffer from Prostitution, unless
1.) Being the prostitute, you suffer mentally from your work.
2.) In either case, you obtain an STD.
Otherwise, you pay someone for pleasure. 'Nuff said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:18 pm
I agree, doing drugs is not a victimless crime. You are the victim, and the government has a responsibility to its citizens to protect them from things that would harm them. This includes highly addictive drugs, because if you make a mistake one time, you could be hooked for years, even the rest of life, all the while regretting it. The ban on marijuana is ridiculous because its not nearly as dangerous as cigarettes, which is a socially acceptable drug to most.
Prostitution is another matter. Morally, it seems wrong to me, but the current situation allows women to be exploited and forced into this "profession" without the government's knowledge. So perhaps that should be legalized too, either that or prostitution should be removed entirely, so that the worst cases of it aren't the ones that slip through the cracks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 7:15 am
Yeah. I think the johns that use prostitutes should go to jail, unless it's like Vegas and everything is legitimate. Prostitutes typically do what they do out of desperation. We shouldn't imprision them for doing what they had to to survive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 7:17 am
olive17 I agree, doing drugs is not a victimless crime. You are the victim, and the government has a responsibility to its citizens to protect them from things that would harm them. This includes highly addictive drugs, because if you make a mistake one time, you could be hooked for years, even the rest of life, all the while regretting it. The ban on marijuana is ridiculous because its not nearly as dangerous as cigarettes, which is a socially acceptable drug to most. Prostitution is another matter. Morally, it seems wrong to me, but the current situation allows women to be exploited and forced into this "profession" without the government's knowledge. So perhaps that should be legalized too, either that or prostitution should be removed entirely, so that the worst cases of it aren't the ones that slip through the cracks. Drug addicts shouldn't be penalized, they should be helped. Getting rid of prostitution is never going to happen. Legalizing it would be great. It's better for the prostitutes, and the slime balls that use them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 7:49 am
EsgarBlackpoxs kind wench EsgarBlackpoxs Well, I'd still call drug users victims. Regardless of whether they made the choice or not, they're still a victim. And they can't put you in jail for commiting suicide. You're dead. Kind of takes the air out from under teh penitentiary systems wings. for many people living in urban society, dealing drugs and prostituting is very common and i don't see the harm in it. If you make bad decisions about how you treat your body and spend your money (or earn your living) why does the government care? I think it's a hindrance to free will. So, you would accept infants drinking, say, bleach? Or teenagers doing that? I don't see the harm in prostitution (unless they have STD's), but my issue with drugs is that they can really destroy lives because of their addictive nature. I have a problem when kids in elementary/middle school are being arrested on drug charges. Ok, first off, what's wrong with survival of the fittest? If parents do not educate their children, they ARE at risk. Next, if someone makes a ton of bad decisions, becomes a drug addict and stays alive and sane enough to realize they have a problem and want to change, they have that option to go to rehab. It should not be forced on someone who has not committed crimes that have victims - if they are a drug addict who steals and/or is violent, that's different, let the justice system do its thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 7:54 am
The Tragic Mime Well, drug users are victims in themselves. I dont see anything wrong with prostitution, though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 8:31 am
These crimes though are not strictly victimless. But the government sees drugs as a threat as they undermine their authority and make useless drones of a small percentage of the population this is why the US is so antidrugs. Prostitution in Australia is legal so it's a little difficult for me to understand but I think it's to do with the 'morale implications' upon a community and the spread of disease.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 8:42 am
[fi]ona The Tragic Mime Well, drug users are victims in themselves. I dont see anything wrong with prostitution, though. I dont know. Seeing that taking drugs /does/ hurt yourself and that prostitution hurts nobody (except in the case she's a kinky psycho-b***h and gives you an STD), I dont see the problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 10:26 am
kind wench EsgarBlackpoxs kind wench EsgarBlackpoxs Well, I'd still call drug users victims. Regardless of whether they made the choice or not, they're still a victim. And they can't put you in jail for commiting suicide. You're dead. Kind of takes the air out from under teh penitentiary systems wings. for many people living in urban society, dealing drugs and prostituting is very common and i don't see the harm in it. If you make bad decisions about how you treat your body and spend your money (or earn your living) why does the government care? I think it's a hindrance to free will. So, you would accept infants drinking, say, bleach? Or teenagers doing that? I don't see the harm in prostitution (unless they have STD's), but my issue with drugs is that they can really destroy lives because of their addictive nature. I have a problem when kids in elementary/middle school are being arrested on drug charges. Ok, first off, what's wrong with survival of the fittest? If parents do not educate their children, they ARE at risk. Next, if someone makes a ton of bad decisions, becomes a drug addict and stays alive and sane enough to realize they have a problem and want to change, they have that option to go to rehab. It should not be forced on someone who has not committed crimes that have victims - if they are a drug addict who steals and/or is violent, that's different, let the justice system do its thing. As for the survival of the fittest thing, I shudder for your future (or current, if thats the case) children. And as for the "victimless" nature of drug usage, are you telling me that there are no victims when kids in middle school start ODing, and 11 year olds are walking down that path? Now, I acknowledge that I'm using some fairly extreme (although they are an issue with the particular drug I'm referring to), but there are still victims in drug usage. Of ocurse, I can see how you might percieve people destroying their lives as "survival of the fittest".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 10:32 am
Drug usage does have victims but those 'children' are victims of their socio-economic background, parents and government. Who now the price of their dear blood doth hold.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 10:41 am
olive17 I agree, doing drugs is not a victimless crime. You are the victim, and the government has a responsibility to its citizens to protect them from things that would harm them. This includes highly addictive drugs, because if you make a mistake one time, you could be hooked for years, even the rest of life, all the while regretting it. The ban on marijuana is ridiculous because its not nearly as dangerous as cigarettes, which is a socially acceptable drug to most... That may be true when it comes to objects or products (ex: "smoking kills" on cigarettes or the FDA) but the government should only intervene when harm can come from another person. So long as the activity places no burden on society, the government has no right to intervene. For example, if I am stupid enough to take some drugs that could kill me, then that's my problem, not the governments. The problem arises when I a)start stealing stuff or whathaveyou to get my fix or b) become a burden on society by living on welfare checks and never becoming a productive cog in the system. Otherwise though (as in the discussed example of prostitution) as kind wench noted we should be able to do whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 10:55 am
Interesting side note: in Amsterdamm when heroin was legalised and give out by the governement, consumption grew in the first year then dropped along with OD rates and burglery rates. It appears the government's intervention into drugs has a positive outcome when it is supportive in nature.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![[fi]ona's avatar](https://a1cdn.gaiaonline.com/dress-up/avatar/ava/ac/27/5aa347f72527ac_flip.png?t=1199319266_6.00_00)
