Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-12-2015, 01:29 PM
 
12,883 posts, read 13,988,455 times
Reputation: 18451

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by tom1944 View Post
There are a lot of things that are not good for you that we do not criminalize people for using or selling. Where do you draw the line and why do you draw it there?

My line people should only be subject to criminal charges when they take action that hurts someone else or force people to do something against their will.

Taking drugs, smoking cigarettes, drinking alcohol to excess, overeating junk food till I get diabetes should not be criminal. Selling any of the above to willing buyers should not be criminal either.
Well, we criminalize the sale of tobacco and alcohol to minors (not even minors for alcohol because the legal age where one is no longer a minor is 18 and the age of consent 16 in many states). If caught, people drinking underage will be arrested. We criminalize drinking and driving. Not exactly the same because alcohol and tobacco aren't totally illegal but we have limits. It's not a free for all. There's discussion of raising the legal "smoking age", too - or at least the age you can buy cigarettes. I imagine we are tougher on hard drugs because they are so dangerous and damaging to not just individuals but families. Tobacco isn't a drug that can give you a bad high and make you dangerous and crazy or even possibly kill you with one hit. Neither is alcohol, really, when used casually and not overdone. Overeating junk food damages no one but yourself. Using tobacco damages no one but yourself. Secondhand smoke is danerous but that's why smoking indoors at many places, including restaurants, isn't allowed. The only one a little similar to hard drugs is alcohol.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-12-2015, 01:37 PM
 
2,499 posts, read 2,626,467 times
Reputation: 1789
Who said legal drugs should have no limits. I would limit by age, control the strength and punish people who harm others while they are under the influence

I have no issue with minors not allowed to buy drugs and driving under the influence of drugs should be criminal

Make cigarettes completely illegal and watch criminal behavior spike in those that want to smoke.

So for consistency you are for prohibition of alcohol again?

What is your stance on pot?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2015, 01:44 PM
 
12,883 posts, read 13,988,455 times
Reputation: 18451
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom1944 View Post
Who said legal drugs should have no limits.
No one. I never said legal drug should have no limits, I was talking about which drugs are already legal with limits in place, because you said this: "There are a lot of things that are not good for you that we do not criminalize people for using or selling. Where do you draw the line and why do you draw it there?" We DO criminalize people for using and selling alcohol and tobacco, under a certain age, and we criminalize driving under the influence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tom1944 View Post
I have no issue with minors not allowed to buy drugs and driving under the influence of drugs should be criminal

Make cigarettes completely illegal and watch criminal behavior spike in those that want to smoke.
I think you missed my point…

Quote:
Originally Posted by tom1944 View Post
So for consistency you are for prohibition of alcohol again?
Absolutely not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tom1944 View Post
What is your stance on pot?
Don't like it. But don't really care because while it often makes people lazy and dumb, too chilled out and forgetful, it's not dangerous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2015, 01:45 PM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,693,520 times
Reputation: 24590
I hate to get into this because its not nearly as important as the individual freedom aspect but legalization would also open things up to regulation and also quality control and better products. I know people pretend that legalization would cause everyone to walk around like zombies or robbing everyone for money but that hasn't really happened in places who have some form of legalized drugs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2015, 01:56 PM
 
2,499 posts, read 2,626,467 times
Reputation: 1789
The article I linked on Portugal documents that

I meant we do not penalize adults. Minors are a completely different issue
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2015, 01:59 PM
 
12,883 posts, read 13,988,455 times
Reputation: 18451
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom1944 View Post
The article I linked on Portugal documents that

I meant we do not penalize adults. Minors are a completely different issue
I wouldn't call an 18-20 year old a minor. Or 18-19 for tobacco.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2015, 02:07 PM
 
2,499 posts, read 2,626,467 times
Reputation: 1789
I agree with you there. We either make minors under 18 or 21 and make our rules accordingly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2015, 02:14 PM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,693,520 times
Reputation: 24590
maybe 18 if you move out of your house for college and 21 if you still live with your mommy during college.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2015, 11:04 PM
 
Location: Mid-Atlantic
32,932 posts, read 36,351,383 times
Reputation: 43773
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
I think people use drugs responsibly all the time. I also think many people don't and the negative consequences harm them and people close to them. but that doesn't mean we have the right to be other people's mothers and lock them up if they make poor decisions. everyone should have the freedom to make their own bad decisions.
Responsibly, or at least show up for work on time. I've known a few people who were prescription pill, coke or meth addicts who managed to keep their very nice white collar job while abusing drugs. They all eventually stopped doing that and cleaned up. It was tough because they couldn't let the boss know they were detoxing. Vacation days, sick days become very handy during those dark days.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2015, 09:17 AM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,693,520 times
Reputation: 24590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerania View Post
Responsibly, or at least show up for work on time. I've known a few people who were prescription pill, coke or meth addicts who managed to keep their very nice white collar job while abusing drugs. They all eventually stopped doing that and cleaned up. It was tough because they couldn't let the boss know they were detoxing. Vacation days, sick days become very handy during those dark days.
good for them. it probably would have been harder for them to keep their jobs if they were locked up in prison.

i was thinking before about scalzo's contempt for rehab but love for prison. i havent considered a "solution" because for me its simply not ok for government to restrict people's freedom when there is no direct victim. but his position seems strange to me considering that locking people up is very expensive. not only are there very high costs with incarceration, police work, court work & whatever treatment they do in prison but there also is a cost to the drug user of court costs, lost work, potential job loss and potential challenges in attaining employment with a criminal history. if we did a cost/benefit analysis, i would imagine that rehab probably is significantly cheaper than incarceration. i can certainly understand someone not wanting to pay for rehab for drug users but its not really consistent if you do support incarceration as the alternative.

oh and scalzo may or may not understand why he holds this position. i believe he is a former police officer and if you check drug legalization initiatives in other states you will find that the political forces opposed to opposition are criminal justice trade organizations (corrections officers unions, police unions, lawyer groups, etc). its a jobs thing for them.

Last edited by CaptainNJ; 05-13-2015 at 09:27 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:52 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top