Alcohol is relevant, since it's dangerous and drags down society. But, you have every right to produce it, sell it, or consume it. You don't have the right to force your opinion on the morality of alcohol on to anyone. You don't have the right to kidnap anyone for selling or consuming it. You can put whatever drug you want to into the equation. The morality never changes.Michael K. wrote: ↑Fri Apr 07, 2023 8:45 pmWhich is WHY this is a strawman. Because, my entire point has been that people are buying drugs that are laced with fentanyl, and then dying. THAT was my response to you saying selling drugs if fine because it is a transaction between two people that both know what they are doing. WHEN someone dies from something in the drug that they did not know was in the drug!? THAT is when your debate loses credibility, and THAT IS THE ONLY THING I WAS DISCUSSION. So, bringing up alcohol is a StrawMan at best and completely irrelevant to the topic at worst. Please, what the fuck does people dying from the long term effects of abusing alcohol have to do with what I said. Also, do you really think that people drinking alcohol die at a HIGHER percentage than those that abuse drugs? It's like saying more people die from auto accidents than jumping off a bridge, so we should make cars illegal and legalize jumping off a bridge.DanielVogelbach wrote: ↑Fri Apr 07, 2023 1:30 am
#1 Alcohol is indeed a very dangerous and deadly drug. I never said anything about it killing after one sip or being laced with fentanyl
Now, if the effect of a drug impairs judgement, and the person commits a crime, then at that point there's actual unlawful activity. If you get high on crack and go rob a bank, then we have an actual crime.
Mountain climbing, sky diving, eating junk food, drinking alcohol, gambling, prostitution, adultery. These might not be the safest or most desirable things. But, if there's no aggression being used, then there's no moral ground to use aggression against the consenting parties.
I'm not advocating for anyone to use or sell drugs, but I'm advocating for objective morality. If people are selling fentanyl, and the customers are not being forced to buy anything, then there is are no moral grounds to forcefully interfere with that.
It would be moral and humanitarian to try and convince and persuade people to voluntarily stop selling or using dangerous drugs. Or, you could work on ways to improve society. Increasing the amount of love and prosperity in the world will always reduce degenerate behavior. But, you can't morally use aggression towards non aggressive people. This extends beyond the kidnapping of drug dealers and also includes things like forcing people to have a license to drive, a passport to travel, or pay taxes on their property. Basically, if someone is minding their own business, then nobody has any legitimate authority to interfere with that. If you disagree with that, then you're a socialist, collectivist, communist, etc.