I find it very funny one would call on a newsprint story, when I can find many and enforced factual reports about how crime STILL is rampant with drugs legalized.. In the US there is actually a politician in one state who admittedly said he read the 2nd Amendment and realized it supported that all men of a certain age are REQUIRED BY LAW to be armed at all times, so he is putting forth taxation on those who refuse to carry firearms for payment of having to protect them.... Now, if this was realized across all the world you would be a safer person...
Ah yes, since I chose a newsprint story it is unreliable, because your uncited "enforced factual reports" say otherwise. Well the reason I listed the particular news story was because it was the most recent having been released that very day. As far as sources are concerned I, being a Criminology major, am always amused by the amount of "facts" people throw around in terms of crime.
Let me clear some things up off the bat. You said "crime STILL is rampant with drugs legalized". I don't know your sources, nor do I care what they are (because most of these reports can be manipulated to support either side of the argument) but I will take the position assuming this is 100% accurate. Nobody ever said legalizing drugs would get rid of crime. That is an asinine assumption. I am not sure how one measures "rampant", however, assuming crime was "rampant" still in certain areas after legalization without specifying type of crime is pointless.
In order to have any sort of logical debate we must refer to drug related crime. More specifically though what type of drug related crime. There are three types. (1)Pharmacological [refers to physiological effects on the body, such as drugs triggering violent behavior. The classic scenario of the guy who does drugs, goes crazy and kills people], (2)Economic [refers to crimes committed to obtain drugs or money for drugs. The classic scare tactic scenario of the drug user who needs a fix so he kills you to steal your wallet so he can go buy drugs], (3) Systemic [refers to violence associated with the sale and distribution of drugs, This should be self-explanatory]. The media will have you believe that Pharmacological and Economic factors are the most prevalent, but it is quite the opposite. The majority of violent drug related crime is systemic. Only a small percentage is economic and pharmacological. (Legalizing drugs removes the systemic factor, no Cartel and no drug dealers means no trafficking etc.) I currently cannot find my sources for national data, but I'll give some real facts from New York in 1988 (a period where drug use and violence in america were near the highest). They classified that 53% of homicides that year were drug related. Of those, 39% were systemic, 2% were economic, 8% were pharmacological, and 4% had multiple drug related causes. The overall violent drug related crime rates are very similar to the homicide rates. This is an important factor that most people either don't realize or ignore.
Disregarding "facts" or statistics altogether there is an ideological perspective of the freedom of adults being able to make their own decisions, and the government not having the right to tell you what you can put in your own body.
Since we are both finding things "very funny" I would like to point out how "very funny" it is to me that you bring up the 2nd Amendment. So many times I hear pro-gun rights advocates argue against the legalization of drugs, and they use the same fallacious arguments that anti-gun rights people use against them. "legalizing drugs and crime is STILL rampant or more rampant" "if we legalize drugs we will see an overwhelming increase in violence" Just replace drugs with guns in those statements and maybe you will see what I am saying. You cannot punish responsible law abiding citizens for the actions of criminals. The criminals will continue to break the rules, and the law abiding citizens will be the only ones who suffer. As a gun-rights supporter, do you accept arguments about children who kill themselves or others in accidents or criminals who kill others with a gun as sufficient evidence to ban guns? I doubt it. So why accept the same illogical argument for drugs?
I would like to add that I am a supporter of the 2nd Amendment and gun rights. However any politician who wants people to be required by law to carry firearms and putting forth taxation as a form of punishment is an ENEMY of freedom, and of the constitution. Libertarians are about adults having the freedom of choice, to make their own decisions, whether you view them good or bad. You cannot use force to make people safer (by making them carry guns or by any other means such as drug laws). It saddens me that people have such an ignorant child-like mentality, thinking they can make the world a better place by forcing them to do what they thinks best for them. Just another form of a Nanny state. These are the same people who want to ban smoking, trans-fats, tables with sharp corners, hot coffee, etc.
I would further like to apologize to :: for ranting in his comments when it has nothing to do with his art in particular.
His art is great! It is the idiots who feel that the need to say gun control works misses the fact even stated by NRA, ILA, GOA, and the US CDC states that the Brady campaign "lose fact" that 80 people a day are killed by guns do not tell you they factor in law abiding gun users saving lives with a gun, that a major number are suicides and that 80% of the number they say is gang crime against other gangs or law abiding people... As a criminology major, you should already KNOW this... and about drugs.... are you then if you become a parole officer blame the drug on the behavior? Or is it really you miss the point people make choices? Scum of the earth is still scum of the earth... As a criminology major try looking into the Gilmore case... Oh, you HAVE to have heard of it.. remember, Look up "Gilmore Gun" psychotic killer who made people get on the ground swearing he would not kill them and execute them anyway after saying if they comply to his wishes they would be spared.... he spared none... This is beyond fact, it is history. If you legalize drugs are you not complying to criminal behavior of those under addiction to allow them to use drugs as the defense for the actions they take?? Not even the law supports this...
People who are against the legalization of drugs often use emotion rather than logic to form their beliefs, and they usually haven't done their research, rather they form scenario's in their head that have no supportive evidence (increased drug use, chaos in the streets, etc.)
Very nice poster! I'd be a libertarian, but for two things. As Jonah Goldberg put it, "If libertarianism could account for children and foreign policy, it would be the most preferable form of government"
You should read Ron Paul's 'The Revolution: A Manifesto'. The first two chapters will educate you all about the foreign policy of our founding fathers, and foreign policy according to the Constitution. Maybe, this will explain some misunderstandings or disliking of our foreign policy. (common misconception is we are isolationists) I have hope you will come over to the light side.