Sort:  

So if we legalize street drugs, Walmart and Amazon will put the Crips, the cartels and the terrorists out of business. If teenagers want to sell drugs they will need to get a job at Walgreens or CVS.

It's an important distinction, but we need to decriminalize, not legalize. Fuck legalization. It is a control and theft (tax) mechanism.

Control and tax are what is missing in the narcotics market now. Mostly people die because those things are lacking. Either by being killed by a gang member or by being killed by an impure, inconsistent, unlabeled product. Something in a baggie of unknown purity or consistency and you don't even know what it is cannot be safely injected. You get that right?

You just defined damn near everything Big Pharma gets passed through the FDA...you do realize that right?

No, go ahead and explain it to me in detail.

As @justusagenstum already pointed out, have you heard of the FDA? They have plenty of control, yet they regularly make terrible decisions when it comes to people's health. It is a racket for corporatism and profit regardless of the damage done to an individual's health.

The government taxes and controls tobacco and alcohol and countless other substances that kill untold amounts of people each year. Go look up prescription drug deaths as another example. Doctors prescribing FDA approved pain killers kill thousands of people a year.

Hows all their control working out?

The FDA does not regulate schedule one drugs, those drugs are prohibited from being regulated. The government taxes and controls tobacco and alcohol and countless other substances that kill smaller and smaller amounts of people each year. Why would you oppose my idea to legalize the natural drugs that are safer and preferable to your "big pharma" synthetics?
Its working pretty great, when was the last time a tablet you bought from a store was cut with baby laxative or an unknown amount of Chinese fentanyl?

So without the government when someone sells you or someone in your family poison, what is your recourse?

You'd bring them before a common law court. They refuse? They lose protection from the same court in the future. It is a system that has already been well thought out before.

I don't oppose natural drugs. All substances are "natural." Nature provides us our medicine as food. I just completely reject the idea of regulation and control over what we decide to consume or not.

It can all be done through private enterprise. There are countless standards and control associations for countless professions. You have them for all other sorts of standards from networking, electronics, electrical, etc. We do not need the government to organize, cooperate, or interact as humans.

"You'd bring them before a common law court. They refuse? They lose protection from the same court in the future. It is a system that has already been well thought out before."
ROFL you hear that Jose? If you sell any more poison the common law court won't protect you!
So who pays for the common law court?

"I don't oppose natural drugs. All substances are "natural." Nature provides us our medicine as food. I just completely reject the idea of regulation and control over what we decide to consume or not."
How can you control what you decide to consume if the products you are sold do not contain what you were told they do? How can you control what you consume if you cannot actually determine what it is?

"It can all be done through private enterprise. There are countless standards and control associations for countless professions. You have them for all other sorts of standards from networking, electronics, electrical, etc. We do not need the government to organize, cooperate, or interact as humans."

Those "standards" are mostly government standards, have you ever been to a country without all the air pollution regulations on fuels and vehicles that we have here?
There will always be a government because there are roles that simply must be filled, nature abhors a vacuum, in the absence of a organized and democratic government despots and gangsters take power. Are you familiar with the concept of a dominant protection agency?

What is your recourse when a family member becomes addicted, or worse yet, dies from a prescription drug approved by the FDA and promoted by Big Pharma? Unless you have the financial resources to stand toe-to-toe with Big Brother, in a justice system corrupt from the highest seat to the lowest bailiff, you stand very little chance of winning a trial case and being awarded compensation, resulting in ZERO closure for the victim/victim's family...however, if a drug dealer off the street sells you poison, and you are fortunate enough to have them charged, you stand a much better chance of winning the case...and although you won't receive compensation, closure will come in the form of a prison sentence.

Quick math comparison; how many employees of the FDA/Big Pharma have been arrested and charged with a felony as a result of fatal overdose from prescription medicines...? Go ahead, I'll wait for you to look up the answer...ZERO! How many street level drug dealers have been arrested and charged with a felony as a result of fatal overdose from the drugs they were peddling? Care to look that answer up...I'll do it for you...so damn many that "privatized" prisons are now a booming industry.

Mass tort, no money needed. I have won several, you don't get any such notices?
Of course you need a government with courts to make that happen. Now, try to sue your illegal drug dealer and tell me how that works out.
Illegal drug dealers are almost never charged with the overdoses their clients have. since you looked that up for me though, what is the exact number?

Also, if someone laces a product they sell with poison, some other harmful substance, or sells horse tranquilizers instead of heroin, they should be held criminally liable. The consensual transaction by itself or using the substance you wanted to buy isn't a crime however.

Criminally liable by the government for breaking those regulations?

No, not the government. Ugh. Please look up the concept of common law courts. Not from breaking regulations either but from HARMING someone or their property. Those are things that should be crimes. Vices are not crimes.

"common law" refers to British common law, a set of basic civil laws. Who builds the courthouses? who pays for the heat? who selects judges? who determines what is legal and what is not?
The government via taxation. That is one of their most basic and essential tasks. Without the government you don't have a third party to settle disputes in a civil manner, then you have chaos and violence as people settle disputes in an uncivil manner.

@finnian, you're wasting your breath with this "know-it-all." They're incapable of doing any personal research...much like the trolls on other social media platforms...full of self-righteousness and unfounded arguments, resides beneath a bridge and tries to scare anyone with an opinion that isn't as morally superior as theirs...you cannot educate the unwilling, for you have nothing to teach them that they didn't know coming out of the womb.