Honestly, I'd absolutely do coke if it were legal, and it would almost surely fuck me up.

So you assume that because you have addictive tendencies you wouldn't be able to control, no-one else could do that either?

I'm a pretty extroverted and confident person. I've done cocaine more than a dozen times. I understand that for some it's incredibly attractive, but for me, I just don't need the extra energy or confidence, so it doesn't do much for me, which is why I don't see it as being worth it.

I've driven a taxi for years in Finland. Most of those people were less responsible with a more debilitating substance than this one person who I visited whole in the Netherlands. A family of four my friend knew. We spent the evening with them, lovely kids. They put them to bed after a few hours. We smoked some weed with a friend, drank beer. The wife drank a glass of wine, no more, the husband none. Once the kids were put to bed, they got a bag of coke, we did a few lines, talked for a few hours, and then they went to bed before 1am and we left to continue our evening.

My point being it isn't the substance which magically makes someone irresponsible. People with a debilitating alcohol addiction aren't much less irritating or less dangerous than people seriously addicted to say, opiates, crack or meth. They're usually annoying in different ways, but there's not much more difference.

I might not do opiates, but honestly, if I had back pain or surgery and they gave me opiates, I probably would take it up after.

So again, you recognise there is a need for painkillers, they're really important afterwards orthopedic surgery (I broke my arm last year, didn't want to do any opiates but they're explained why taking them for the first few days was actually beneficial), but you'd... like for there not to be prescription meds?

Or perhaps you should seek help for addiction? (It's a psychological disorder, different from dependence to a substance. Medically different. Different diagnosis.)

Because that's how a LOT of people take up drugs.

A lot of people in the US got dependent on opiates because of the massive overprescribing by doctors. The whole Sackler thing? https://www.congress.gov/event/116th-congress/house-event/LC65831/text

They basically abused the prohibition and the legal systems to push one of the most dependence causing substances while actively lying about it being dependence causing.

These are the exact type of issues legalising and being able to regulate would help with. Check this system : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bratt_System

That instead of doctors pushing Oxy prescriptions of several weeks for light sprains, and youre much better off.

Drugs aren't good, you just like them

I don't. I hate drug abuse, which is why I'm so passionately advocating for the only fucking thing that would help with it. I don't do "harder" substances. I don't really or have ever really liked getting drunk. I like to get a bit lubricated, but I hate drinking so much as most people do. (I'm Finnish, we have a heavyweight drinking culture.) I had several friends abuse alcohol as young people, but got over it never really went that bad. I'd say the only reason they "recovered", and never went overboard in the first places is that alcohol is heavily regulated. If it weren't, I'd say several of them would have drunk themselves to death several times over with shitty moonshine.

Some other friends on the other hand, developed amphetamine or other substance abuse issues. And despite trying our damndest to intervene, even calling their parents and trying to talk about it, there was nothing we could do. Calling the cops on them would have been counterproductive.

I advocate for a system that would be able to help those, and afford responsible users the freedom to not be ostracised for choosing to get slightly inebriated with something else than alcohol.

I only smoke weed, occasionally have a drink (up to like four), but it's been years since I did anything else. I did experiment with lots of substance. Never shot up anything. Opiates only in the hospital, but I know the effects. My favourite ones are definitely mild psychedelics, ecstasy and laughing gas. All very harmless when compares to other substances. https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2019/06/25/what-is-the-most-dangerous-drug

And those are all substances you can get addicted to, but, not really dependent on them. Serotonergic substances (lsd, shrooms, ecstasy) don't really work after two days of using them. You have to have a break of several days. There are obviously people who go clubbing everywhere weekend, but if they only do ecstasy and don't drink, they're really aren't that much worse for wear, unless they do like a dozen e's. When I went to events with mostly ecstasy users, it was incredible. No-one ever fought or was mad, everyone was friends and trusting, but not like in a stupidly trusting way. Just every kind and chill and honest people for the most part. Because of the ecstasy, ofc, and that'd wear off the next day, but made some of my best friends from those gigs, and still never done "drugs" outside of those events, and a large part of the honesty and directness remained in those relationships.

So I really do think society would benefit from (young) people being able to spend their weekend dancing and actually socialising with mild and good quality MDMA (and having milder pills you would know the exact mg amount on would help a ton with that).

The evidence of MDMA and psychedelic assisted therapy is pretty amazing.

https://maps.org/mdma/

You need to understand the distinction between really easily abusable drugs from those though. Such as coke, opiates, meth, alcohol, etc.

they break assumptions evolution made, and we're not quite ready for that yet.

They don't actually, and I could write a several page thesis for you why it's actually the opposite of that.

If nukes were legal, do you think everyone could be trusted with them?

Lol this is completely different; affecting yourself with some substance, something humanity has done for as long as we can imagine (there's evidence of opium, weed, beer for thousands of years) or weapons of mass destruction which can wipe out the planet and make it I habitable for centuries? Have you ever heard of what a strawman fallacy is?

Because most people have self-control, but not all, and before you say "Drugs don't hurt other people!", yes, they absolutely do, you just don't give a shit about them.

Fuck you. You pretend to care about them, but don't, and I bet my left testicle that I've done a while bunch more for substance abuse issues and substance abusers than you ever will.

If you actually cared, you'd consider what I'm saying, realise I'm advocating for the things you pretend to be for, because you don't realise your attitude has been so vastly manipulated by drug war propaganda that you haven't bothered to educate yourself on the issue. Read some of these links I've left, truly, and give it at least a day for your brain to mull it over, then hopefully realise I'm earnestly fighting against the prohibition, because I realise just how much getting rid of the war on drugs would help globally.

https://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/world-leaders-call-for-legalisation-of-drugs

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3202501/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_entheogenic_drugs

https://psychedelics.berkeley.edu/resources/entheogens-a-brief-history-of-their-spiritual-use/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_TV4GuXFoA&t=717 the entirety video is good, but with that timestamp is the author of "Good Cop, Bad War" stating their position on the drug war. And he's been fighting with the police against drugs in special agencies and finally had enough.

You could listen to his entire audiobook even.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKoNuDWsd9Y

There's honestly zero reasons to support the prohibition except for benefitting from illegally drug markets. I'm not saying you're completely wrong, I honestly used to think exactly like you on the matter. But then I read, and read, and read. Took up this position because it was the only one which actually makes sense. The opposition doesn't have any arguments we can't already show that lifting prohibition and setting up legalised regulated system wouldn't help with.

Please. I know that's a lot of links, and because of my attitude and the some of the insults, you don't want to check them. But I didn't write them. Just don't reply to me instantly. Give a bit of a browse to them. Maybe reply tomorrow, when both of us are less wound up and you be slept after having browsed some of the info.

Please?

edit wrote this on my phone, so many ducking auto cock rekts

And yet vast majority of their population had him at over 90% approval and thought everything he did was necessary to maintain order.

There’s already far more trauma, and even more to be inflicted if he didn’t go all out against gangs. If you aren’t from that area or other similarly dangerous country you wouldn’t really get how desperate it gets. He 100% was necessary.

They’re no longer the murder capital of the world and safer than even Canada. Women can actually walk outside and children can play.