A Proposed Law Would Force Internet Companies to Spy on Their Users for the DEA | The Cooper Davis Act would force tech companies to report suspected drug activity to the government. Experts say it...
gizmodo.com
The Cooper Davis Act would force tech companies to report suspected drug activity to the government. Experts say it would be a disaster for digital privacy.
You are viewing a single comment
Combating drugs is good, spying is not good, you need a very transparent law that tackles the issue in a smart way.
EDIT: Why the downvotes? Is this a pro-drugs community?
Because the war on drugs was lost before our government (or any government) even started fighting it.
The DEA is neither necessary or helpful. Legalizing and regulating drugs - and yes, I do mean all drugs - would do far more to improve safety for people who want to, for one reason or another, use drugs (and “drugs” absolutely includes alcohol - it’s a substance that affects your mental state when consumed).
Or, you know, we could actually correct the root cause, which is wealth inequality, general despair over much of what’s happening in the world these days, and endemic poverty and homelessness. But that wouldn’t be profitable, and supply-side Jesus wouldn’t like that.
combatting drugs is bad. it leads to a black market and unreliable product, resulting in overdoses & deaths
A drug addict does not make any contributions to society, he's the living dead.
Funny how alcohol addicts are allowed to participate in society normally though while no one in any high paying job is allowed to smoke a joint.
I know lots of alcoholics that still show up to work and contribute to society everyday
Alcohol, cigars and then... cocaine, LSD, crack? Are you honestly making this comparison?
Could you look someone in the eye and tell that cocaine and tobacco are the same thing?
Our drug war is a fucking farce. It is, and always has been, a fascist culture war.
Now we're talking, I like to see numbers and data. You're clearly different from the others here.
Now go a biiit further and check usage statistics for alcohol, cocaine and opioids. Is it the same number of people using all three?
No thanks. But you go right ahead.
Now, now, I wonder how many dozens of millions of people are using cocaine each year.
Cocaine is not particularly dangerous. Oddly enough opioids are safe if, and only if, the user knows the specific opioid being used and it’s actual purity and doesn’t use improper techniques to use it. It doesn’t usually kill or cause major medical issues if the dosage and purity are known and clean needles are used. Alcohol is a medical issue at basically any dosage. There is no safe way to consume it. Tobacco is in the same category: all use is harmful, smoking is excessively harmful.
The point is we tolerate obviously harmful drugs, some of us refuse to admit they are drugs, or put them in some category where they should not be considered when discussing drug abuse. Why do people do this? As I said, it seems very much to be a cultural issue. Alcohol and tobacco, by far our most lethal drug abuse problems, are accepted as part of ‘our’ culture. By ‘our’ I mean the dominant European Christian culture- white people. The ‘bad’ drugs are all associated with ‘outsiders’, people not part of the dominant culture. Quite obviously also this cultural categorization is racist bullshit. White people are just as likely to be using the ‘bad’ drugs as non white people. So it’s an ideological campaign to justify what has become a corrupt government/capitalist ‘complex’. The failed drug war pumps billions of dollars into the private sector. There is no motivation to stop what is a quite successful system as far as the recipients of all that loot are concerned.
But certainly just simply adopting a harm reduction approach instead of continuing the idiocy of criminalization cannot be taken seriously. After all we cannot compare cigars to LSD.
Stopped reading here.
Your mind is closed. Here is an interesting study on circulatory issues related to cocaine, tobacco, and combined usage. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199402173300702
Note that cocaine alone appeared to be less harmful than tobacco, for the focus of the study: Coronary-Artery Vasoconstriction
But you know better.
"drugs are actually healthy"
Do you agree with the statement above?
I am not saying crack or other drugs are harmless, but man, have you ever seen an alcohol addict? It completely destroys your body, mind and family (which you like to mention when it comes to other drugs). You can absolutely compare it to crack.
I see, so you're arguing we must ban both alcohol and drugs? You bring a hard bargain, I'm interested in the connotations of this.
This has already been tried and didn‘t work. People consumed it anyway (surprise).
Why have laws then?
Can you tell me how it affects or even hurts anyone if someone is smoking weed at home? There is literally no point in making it illegal. What you can do is making it illegal to do certain things while under the influence of drugs, for example driving a car. And guess what, exactly this happens with alcohol too. But making the drug itself illegal is imo a bad idea.
We're progressing, we're already talking about limitations and regulations and control in general!
This has been productive for both of us, keep up walking the good path, friend.
The drug market currently is completely unregulated. It‘s easier for a teenager to buy weed, than alcohol. If we make it legal, we can actually regulate it, like alcohol.
This exact mentality, applied to guns, led to the school shooting situation in the US.
Also
Shall we legalize groping? Legalize it (it's unavoidable) and then regulate it (applies rules to how long you can touch, where you can touch, etc)
Because people in power need excuses to hit people they don't like without having to pay weregild for it. That's it, that's the entire purpose of laws. The whole "protecting society" theory is a convenient smokescreen that we've all bought into through generations upon generations of Stockholm syndrome and the fact that we all also want to hit people and be justified in doing so from time to time.
So you want to go back to prohibition ? Because alcohol is a drug.
Want to see a video of how someone looks like after using psychedelic drugs for some time? Will you still make this comparison afterwards?
If you people establish that banning alcohol is a absolute requirement for banning cruel drugs that destroy entire families, so be it.
EDT: Downvoted in 20 seconds.
Look, you'd have to be both purposefully oblivious and living under a rock to not have a notion of what drunk people look like and the research done on the health risks of it, and all the addiction and alcoholism... Like, give me a fucking break.
Edit: I'm saying this to say that humans have accepted the risk associates with alcohol (not saying not to regulate it) and it should equally allow the same for drugs. The only difference is that some drugs are plain out less harmful than alcohol.
Based
Why, is this an anti-drug community?
It is downvoted because you appear to think that more drug laws are the way to address the opiate addiction public health crisis.
Why is it a crisis? I thought you believed drugs were good!! Isn't it almost an utopic situation with all the opiate addicts around? Is this not what you were looking for?
Where did I say ‘drugs are good’?
Oh, are you not a pro-drugs individual? I'm being chased by those who defend drug abuse and a lawless society, sorry if I mistook you for one of the evil-doers.
Eh no, you are repeatedly and dishonestly conflating ‘it’s a public health problem not a criminal justice problem’ with ‘I love all the drugs’. I think I’m done. Arguing with clowns is pointless.
You either defend drugs or you oppose them. Can't look all hipster and defend strict control at the same time.
false dichotomy followed by strawman. You are clowning yourself.
Gr8 b8 m8 I r8 8/8
Down votes are because studies have shown that programs like DARE and the "war on drugs" didn't really make drugs go away, and that we need better solutions that address quality of life and mental health issues to keep people from turning to drugs in the first place. Also, saying we need to "combat" drugs is very adversarial, and reinforces the boogie man of "evil drug users", which helps the passage of overly powerful laws, and often make it easier to exploit minorities.
I also think the simplistic "[let's just] tackle the issue in a smart way" might rub people the wrong way, like "oh, well why didn't we think of that?"
EDIT: Your edit of "people don't agree with me, I guess that means they love drugs" is very assumptive, and close minded.
You're almost there, one more step and you'll realize the true enemy is capitalism. Some of the weaker drugs can be legalized as long as they're kept in strict control.