Huh? How can you answer that big question without answering the subordinate questions? Without those answers, the choice is a society full of addicts with prohibition, or a Society full of addicts without probation.
Huh? How can you answer that big question without answering the subordinate questions? Without those answers, the choice is a society full of addicts with prohibition, or a Society full of addicts without probation.
You have fewer addicts with prohibition. You can argue that the side effects are worse than that benefit, but don't try to tell me that the issue of addicts isn't going to increase catastrophically with legalization.
If you don't think it's true, then we have nothing to talk about. If you honestly believe that widespread increase in drug use does not result in a higher number of addicted people...ok. We live in different realities.
Huh? How can you answer that big question without answering the subordinate questions? Without those answers, the choice is a society full of addicts with prohibition, or a Society full of addicts without probation.
You have fewer addicts with prohibition. You can argue that the side effects are worse than that benefit, but don't try to tell me that the issue of addicts isn't going to increase catastrophically with legalization.
That is an empirical claim. What is your evidence?
If you don't think it's true, then we have nothing to talk about. If you honestly believe that widespread increase in drug use does not result in a higher number of addicted people...ok. We live in different realities.