Legalizing drugs = More Democrats...Careful what you wish for.

[Slade3200]

I have no problem with the legalization of pot. It is less addictive than alcohol. Alcohol and alcoholism kill way more people than pot does.


I do have a problem with legalizing the hard drugs like meth, cocaine and heroine which have a far higher dependency rate coupled with severe intoxication. These drugs are "unsafe at any speed", so to speak.

Like with most controlled substances that are legally sold in the USA there are strong standards that need to be met to sell to the public. A legal product of those “hard” drugs would look different from that which we find on the black market. I don’t use hard drugs and i have no interest in using them, I hope the use of them only goes down, however if a friend or family member of mine was using I’d much rather them use a clean and tested batch over a possible cut and laced batch which could cause them to OD and die.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Hahaha...You poor beggars can’t wrap your head around success...believing everybody is as desperate and pathetic as you makes you feel a little better doesn’t it?

you sound pretty desperate and pathetic yourself.....

You mean like the half men who deliver mail for a career?

i got out of the state unlike this full man who we see crying about were he lives.....and you would not last delivering mail,the first rain you would call in sick and then start crying about not being able to finish your route without someone coming out everyday to give you help...and i have a nice pension....

Haha...yeah, yeah....you mail carriers are total badasses. Mine is about 80lbs overweight and doesn’t seem to struggle with the “route”...must be a demanding, rigorous gig.

There is a lot more to it than what meets the eye.

and i bet his carrier aint 80 pounds overweight....seams more like loser caught a glimpse of himself in the mirror....

 

[LaDexter]

People opposed to legalization are for


1. bankrupting the US
2. enriching and empowering the worst criminal on the planet
3. sowing anti-Americanism globally
4. enriching and empowering corrupt local governments to imprison innocent people
5. waging war against America


in short, people against legalizing support TREASON, plain and simple...

 

[BrokeLoser]

People opposed to legalization are for


1. bankrupting the US
2. enriching and empowering the worst criminal on the planet
3. sowing anti-Americanism globally
4. enriching and empowering corrupt local governments to imprison innocent people
5. waging war against America


in short, people against legalizing support TREASON, plain and simple...

People whom support legalization are for...
1. Encouraging our youth to be less ambitious
2. Expanding our underclass
3. Moving cartels from Mexico to residential neighborhoods here
4. The degradation of American society
5. Compromising American values
in short, people whom support legalizing support FILTH, despair and criminality...plain and simple.

 

[Larsky]

Legal drugs = More drug users = More taxpayer dependent degenerates = More Democrats.

You do realize that opioid and methamphetamine use is higher in red states?

 

[BrokeLoser]

Legal drugs = More drug users = More taxpayer dependent degenerates = More Democrats.

You do realize that opioid and methamphetamine use is higher in red states?

I sure do...you do realize that Democrats reside in red states right?

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Legal drugs = More drug users = More taxpayer dependent degenerates = More Democrats.

Are you saying that you recently changed your voter registration?

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Legal drugs = More drug users = More taxpayer dependent degenerates = More Democrats.

You do realize that opioid and methamphetamine use is higher in red states?

I sure do...you do realize that Democrats reside in red states right?

 

[Larsky]

Legal drugs = More drug users = More taxpayer dependent degenerates = More Democrats.

You do realize that opioid and methamphetamine use is higher in red states?

I sure do...you do realize that Democrats reside in red states right?

Yep amongst the dope addled welfare leeching trump supporters.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Legal drugs = More drug users = More taxpayer dependent degenerates = More Democrats.

You do realize that opioid and methamphetamine use is higher in red states?

I sure do...you do realize that Democrats reside in red states right?

Yep amongst the dope addled welfare leeching trump supporters.

NEGATIVE...try again.
I aim to enlighten the ignorant, self manipulated, confused and uninformed. You're welcome in advance.
21.3% of US Participates in Government Assistance Programs Each Month
Who Participated in Welfare?
The black population: At 41.6 percent, blacks were more likely to participate in government assistance programs in an average month.
The black participation rate was followed by Hispanics at 36.4 percent, Asians or Pacific Islanders at 17.8 percent, and non-Hispanic whites at 13.2 percent.
Help me here....Are Blacks and Hispanics Trump supporters?

California - 12% of the nations population, 33% of the nations welfare recipients.
Note that Hawaii and New York are fighting CA for that number one spot....also note all three are blue states. Here you go:
It Looks Like Red States Take Most in Federal 'Welfare' from this Map. But Looks Can Be Deceiving.
California’s Welfare Benefits: Boom or Bust?
"There has been much discussion about immigrants in the United States from everywhere around the world. Yet, why is it that California seems to attract the most immigrants of any state? Indeed, while the state is only 12% of the nation’s population, it is home to 33% of welfare residents. According to a report published by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) on January 26, 2015, there is a correlation between generous welfare benefits and an increase in immigration.

In total, California outspends every other state in public welfare spending – in 2014, it spent $22.4 billion. In contrast, the next closest state, New York, spent $11.9 billion. That being said, does this make California a magnet for immigrants? Not necessarily. It is more of an anchor – a reason why residents stay for long periods of time in the state. However, to deny that there is no magnet would be incorrect. According to George J. Borjas, the Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and the author of the aforementioned report, the reason as to why people decide to relocate is due to “income-maximizing behavior.” Immigrants have already accepted that there are certain fixed costs that are inevitable because of migration, so it is natural that they will flock towards the places with the highest benefits. Empirical evidence suggests that it is because of these differences that there are an increasingly disproportionate number of immigrants among states. While there is the possibility of alternative explanations for this phenomenon, the conclusion that Borjas draws using the wealth-maximization hypothesis is one such testable method.
However, upon closer examination, on a per-capita basis, California’s seemingly generous benefits pale in data comparison to other states. For example, it spends approximately $179 for every resident, behind $233 in Hawaii and $256 in New York. Furthermore, approximately 8.9% of California residents live in poverty, the highest of any state

 

[Larsky]

Legal drugs = More drug users = More taxpayer dependent degenerates = More Democrats.

You do realize that opioid and methamphetamine use is higher in red states?

I sure do...you do realize that Democrats reside in red states right?

Yep amongst the dope addled welfare leeching trump supporters.

NEGATIVE...try again.
I aim to enlighten the ignorant, self manipulated, confused and uninformed. You're welcome in advance.
21.3% of US Participates in Government Assistance Programs Each Month
Who Participated in Welfare?
The black population: At 41.6 percent, blacks were more likely to participate in government assistance programs in an average month.
The black participation rate was followed by Hispanics at 36.4 percent, Asians or Pacific Islanders at 17.8 percent, and non-Hispanic whites at 13.2 percent.
Help me here....Are Blacks and Hispanics Trump supporters?

California - 12% of the nations population, 33% of the nations welfare recipients.
Note that Hawaii and New York are fighting CA for that number one spot....also note all three are blue states. Here you go:
It Looks Like Red States Take Most in Federal 'Welfare' from this Map. But Looks Can Be Deceiving.
California’s Welfare Benefits: Boom or Bust?
"There has been much discussion about immigrants in the United States from everywhere around the world. Yet, why is it that California seems to attract the most immigrants of any state? Indeed, while the state is only 12% of the nation’s population, it is home to 33% of welfare residents. According to a report published by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) on January 26, 2015, there is a correlation between generous welfare benefits and an increase in immigration.

In total, California outspends every other state in public welfare spending – in 2014, it spent $22.4 billion. In contrast, the next closest state, New York, spent $11.9 billion. That being said, does this make California a magnet for immigrants? Not necessarily. It is more of an anchor – a reason why residents stay for long periods of time in the state. However, to deny that there is no magnet would be incorrect. According to George J. Borjas, the Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and the author of the aforementioned report, the reason as to why people decide to relocate is due to “income-maximizing behavior.” Immigrants have already accepted that there are certain fixed costs that are inevitable because of migration, so it is natural that they will flock towards the places with the highest benefits. Empirical evidence suggests that it is because of these differences that there are an increasingly disproportionate number of immigrants among states. While there is the possibility of alternative explanations for this phenomenon, the conclusion that Borjas draws using the wealth-maximization hypothesis is one such testable method.
However, upon closer examination, on a per-capita basis, California’s seemingly generous benefits pale in data comparison to other states. For example, it spends approximately $179 for every resident, behind $233 in Hawaii and $256 in New York. Furthermore, approximately 8.9% of California residents live in poverty, the highest of any state

Your ham handed attempt to deflect from the OP is duly noted.
What do these hackneyed, cherry picked inaccuracies have to do with the demographics of red state drug epidemics?

You need to up your game.

 

[Crixus]

Legal drugs = More drug users = More taxpayer dependent degenerates = More Democrats.

Actually, the countries which have legalized drugs have FEWER drug users. There are no pushers encouraging people to start using, so the numbers go DOWN, not up. And since those addicted don't have to pay pusher prices and can get heroin for cheap, crimes like robbery, break and enters, and other means of getting enough money to support their habits, also goes DOWN.

Once people are able to be productive and support themselves, it becomes easier for them to get off the drugs and just be productive members of society.

Not really. Even in places where drugs aer legal there is an illicit trade. There will always be one. You also have to define a “drug user” we can toss smokers in there and they cost way more then a heroin addict or a meth bead. Smokers can never miss their 15 minute break or they will be little bitches and not work. Then they smoke in their company vehicles which are basically trashed when they are done with them. Then there are all the health issues that everyone else has to absorb

We can also toss in the drinkers. They kill thousands every month in the US. They cost millions in the legal system due to their need to get into trouble.


Honestly, no one should have a say in what one puts in their body. Considering you can scramble a fetus in the womb and suck it out into the trash and call that “life, liberty and the persist of happiness, if andude wants to snort drain cleaner, why is that so bad?

 

[otto105]

Legal drugs = More drug users = More taxpayer dependent degenerates = More Democrats.

Legal guns = More gun users = More nra dependent degenerates = More lower educated republic voters.

 

[LaDexter]

no one should have a say in what one puts in their body.

That's just hilarious....

Who tells us what we can do, Fraud Jesus?

 

[BrokeLoser]

no one should have a say in what one puts in their body.

That's just hilarious....

Who tells us what we can do, Fraud Jesus?

I think you misunderstood his post. Read it again.

 

[LaDexter]

OK, poor English scrambled the intended meaning....


Pot is not for everyone. But it does real good for some.... and the individual should choose, not the government or the lawyer lobby.

 

[BrokeLoser]

OK, poor English scrambled the intended meaning....


Pot is not for everyone. But it does real good for some.... and the individual should choose, not the government or the lawyer lobby.

I could agree with you so long as we exclude ALL users from any and all taxpayer funded social services and resources....FAIR ENOUGH?
(this might be the part where you pretend you didn’t see this post)

 

[LaDexter]

I could agree with you so long as we exclude ALL users from any and all taxpayer funded social services and resources....FAIR ENOUGH?

You are talking to a libertarian. I don't believe in discrimination. I believe in small government.

Most of the

"taxpayer funded social services and resources"


should be completely ZERO-ed OUT.... so that even prissy sissy's like you don't get any for not toking....

 

[anynameyouwish]

Legal drugs = More drug users = More taxpayer dependent degenerates = More Democrats.

Another freedom loving, nanny state hating, pro personal responsibility conservative has spoken!

 

[BrokeLoser]

I could agree with you so long as we exclude ALL users from any and all taxpayer funded social services and resources....FAIR ENOUGH?

You are talking to a libertarian. I don't believe in discrimination. I believe in small government.

Most of the

"taxpayer funded social services and resources"


should be completely ZERO-ed OUT.... so that even prissy sissy's like you don't get any for not toking....

“Prissy sissy”? Do you know me?
Awesome...that’s one thing I’m with you stand for nothing, no difference making middle grounders on.
I’m all for every man for himself.