Quote Originally Posted by Universal Mind
Should they be illegal?
They? NO they should be dealt with. As they can pose an immediate threat.
You just can't differentiate between should and could eey? The difference between an attempt at public safety and that of an unhealthy habit.



I am tired of your ignorant analogies.
Are you one of the citizens who stand for something and fall for everything?
The thing about psychedelic drugs is that people on them know when they are too messed up to drive cars and cranes.
Well that changes everything!


The analogy helps people understand the drug legalization view. If you think alcohol and tobacco should be legal, then we don't have far to go in getting you to understand why the other drugs should be legal. That is why we use the analogy. Plus, the inconsistency of our drug laws proves the insincerity behind them.
Thanks, it all seems proportionate now.
I think your battling yourself. Who else in this thread is fighting to keep alcohol alive and well? I brought this up from the beginning because straight out of the gates the drug advocates run with this.
Is it inconsistent - YES That has no relevance to make another drug LEGAL. It only shows why another drug should be ILLEGAL.
you are not helping your cause IMHO


Quote Originally Posted by SKA
If pot were legal then still, obviously, only pot smokers would have and smoke it.
And putting it in such a context you made it sound like Marijuana smokers are Outlaws. And outlaw is a rather big word for someone who merely smokes a relaxing, inspiring herb.
And if it were legal? Then what. Would there not be MORE pot smokers?
Or would there only be the well educated few that decide to use another legal drug, like alcohol.