Why isn't there a "no" to choose in the poll, let's be fair here.
I'm not against it, because I'm not interested in what other people are doing in their homes and I don't blame drugs for people's mistakes. If someone does something stupid on drugs it's his fault and he is responsible, not the drug or a person that sold it to him, therefore I support legalization.
Dtto, the OP is an obvious junkie. So obvious in fact, that in progation of his agenda he basically forfeited in semblance of disscussion on the subject. When you cant say "no", then you dont have any choice at all.
3/5 choices are basically "yes". What's up with that?
I'd be able to tolerate marijuana but not opium. Everyone seem to forget why China tried to ban it before. It is addictive, which is why it caused problems in China. Rather than mix it with drinks like what's done in other countries, they smoked it, allowing it to be absorbed faster.
Fake opioids made by drug companies for profit are now the number 1 cause of death in the U.S. in people under 50.
Smoking opium is non fatal and most people will use it like alcohol, occasionally.
Swallowing bits of opium can be fatal, but most people will smoke bit not eat it. The smoke of opium is very sweet and pleasant but eating it is not pleasant, it is extremely bitter. I tried to give a fatally injured dog some opium once and it would not eat it, but the smoke is appealing to all creatures.
I personally, like most people, do not support addiction nor using drugs recreationally, but I was a kid once and do know the appeal it has. Most kids try a lot of stuff, mountain biking, surfing, soldiering, swimming, eating red meat, driving fast on lone roads, etc. All of those things can be fatal and may kill some people if things don't work out well. A person should be limited from imposing death on others, but when a person tests it him or herself they learn or burn, and that is good for the species. You can argue that red meat causes arteriosclerosis that raises health care costs, or swimming causes having to hire lifeguards to patrol beaches, but should the purpose of things be to learn or to maximize profits for companies? Should liberties be given to people, and the price paid by those people, or should it all be given to corporate entities like government?
China banned opium, they have banned a lot of things. So has the U.S. Look at the people on this bulletin noard, a crypto board. Some people you won't see for a lit of reasons, from Alan Turing to Aaron Swartz, because the government did not want to let them exist harmlessly and figure out for themselves what is right and wrong.
1. If you are neither junkie nor wanna be dealer, than why did you post rigged polls?
2. Why do you relativize effects of heavily toxic (yes toxic) drugs in relations to everything else? Should kids just decide for themselves, if they want AK-47 for X-mas? Or a truck for that matter. It is liberty like any other afterall.
3. Good example with China. Do you know why Opium was banned China? For years private subjects saturated pre-communist China with drugs, devastating local population morally, economically and health wise. They did it on purpose too, to weaken the country from within. When the government finally reacted to this criminally evil plot where drugs were the tools - China was invaded by would be colonizers. You are defending evil agenda.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars