Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Which of the following "vices" should be legal (some already are, and some are in certain areas) All can be harmful to either individuals or society to varying degrees. Why or why not? Please though, this is a practical thread. Do not use religious or moral arguments.

Don't use religious or moral arguments.

So I can go shoot my friend because he is annoying!!!

you've spelt alcohol wrong
and it is legal
as far as I know so is gambling and tobacoo


prostitution in many countries as well
and in Holland marijuana..(dunno if anywhere else)


in short words:
I don't understand the question

Originally posted by Clovie
you've spelt alcohol wrong
and it is legal
as far as I know so is gambling and tobacoo


prostitution in many countries as well
and in Holland marijuana..(dunno if anywhere else)


in short words:
I don't understand the question

And you spelled tobacco wrong

All.

we should have more than just one choice. Frankly, the more things you ban, the more criminal industries you create, the more crime and mob violence you have.

All of those except meth and cocain should be legal.

I think that all of them except meth/cocaine should be illegal under the age of 18.

Well over here Prostitution is legal in some forms, Marijuana is legal in small amounts for adults (for private use), Tobacco is legal for anyone over the age of 16, Alcohol is also legal (borderline about thise one is a bit fuzzy dunno where it technically lies, but in general if you go out to a bar and you are older than say 15 they'll prolly give you want you want)
Gambling is legal in the 5 a 10 official casino's in Belgium

Drugs shouldn't be legalized

It's rather bizarre to ask the question 'Which of the following vices should be legal?' whilst acknowledging that some of the ones you have selected are already legal!

My view is that everything should be legal. Personal judgement - or lack there of - should dictate what is used.

tell that too people who lose their entire family because some drunk/high guy crashes into them

Sadly, that kind of thing is already common place, so making it legal to get 'high' is unlikely to change anything in that respect.

By making all drugs legal, the tax made on the sales could be used to educate people, improve public transport, hospitals, welfare and aid research into many of society's ills. The way things are - in regards to drugs - benefits no-one, but still causes tragedies. Why not go for a different approach?

Originally posted by Imaginary
I think that all of them except meth/cocaine should be illegal under the age of 18.

So, you're willing to condone krack-head kindergarten kids, but are unwilling to approve of teenagers puffin' de herb?!?!

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
So, you're willing to condone krack-head kindergarten kids, but are unwilling to approve of teenagers puffin' de herb?!?!

Erm, I think you misunderstood me. Meth and cocaine should be completely illegal, whereas everything else should be legal for those over the age of 18.

Even so, age restrictions on things don't really work, if someone under the age of 18 wants to smoke or drink there's really nothing stopping them.

I think you can't type a coherent sentence.

Originally posted by Echuu
Don't use religious or moral arguments.

So I can go shoot my friend because he is annoying!!!
Because morality is the only consideration there? It's not maladaptive for society as a whole if people kill eachother whenever they feel like it? I'd imagine that way of life would cause minor problems with day to day life, people living in fear all the time. Just a thought.

Ideally, none of these should be legal. That is, none should be indulged in. Nothing good comes out of any of them.
In practice, however, pretty much all of them should be legal. Prohibition is never effective and prohibitting drugs and prostitution in particular just raises the body count. Think of prohibition era Chicago: how many did Al Capone kill? If there's no licensing or intervention in prostitution, women are abused by pimps and customers with little other option. If there's none in the drug trade the attendant violence and shootings kill far more than would otherwise result from, say overdoses and the like. Obviously there's no government intervention in these areas if they're illegal.
Doing stupid things under the influence of or in the interests of getting money to purchase said drugs, on the other hand, obviously needs to be a criminal offense.

The definition of a vice has to do with how immoral something is however
They are degrading, immoral acts or habits: bestiality, corruption, depravity, flagitiousness, immorality, perversion, turpitude, villainousness, wickedness.
So technically none of those are vices except really prostitution.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
I think you can't type a coherent sentence.

I understood what she meant fine, and as no one else commented on it, I take it to assume that everyone else did as well.

Originally posted by silver_tears
The definition of a vice has to do with how immoral something is however
They are degrading, immoral acts or habits: bestiality, corruption, depravity, flagitiousness, immorality, perversion, turpitude, villainousness, wickedness.
So technically none of those are vices except really prostitution.


I beg to differ. Prostitution is the LEAST depraved or immoral of these acts, not to mention the least harmful, both to individuals and society.

Originally posted by Zarathustra
Because morality is the only consideration there? It's not maladaptive for society as a whole if people kill eachother whenever they feel like it? I'd imagine that way of life would cause minor problems with day to day life, people living in fear all the time. Just a thought.

Ideally, none of these should be legal. That is, none should be indulged in. Nothing good comes out of any of them.
In practice, however, pretty much all of them should be legal. Prohibition is never effective and prohibitting drugs and prostitution in particular just raises the body count. Think of prohibition era Chicago: how many did Al Capone kill? If there's no licensing or intervention in prostitution, women are abused by pimps and customers with little other option. If there's none in the drug trade the attendant violence and shootings kill far more than would otherwise result from, say overdoses and the like. Obviously there's no government intervention in these areas if they're illegal.
Doing stupid things under the influence of or in the interests of getting money to purchase said drugs, on the other hand, obviously needs to be a criminal offense.


I'd say this is the best answer so far.

I disagree, alcohol is not in any way immoral if itis so greatly accepted by society, and it really is.
Drunk driving is another thing, but alcohol itself is not immoral.
For something to be immoral it would have to go against the beliefs and such of the majority.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
I think you can't type a coherent sentence.

Like Lana said, everyone else seemed to understand it fine.

Originally posted by silver_tears
I disagree, alcohol is not in any way immoral if itis so greatly accepted by society, and it really is.
Drunk driving is another thing, but alcohol itself is not immoral.
For something to be immoral it would have to go against the beliefs and such of the majority.


Yet heavy drinking is considered a Vice. Did you know alchohol related deaths are second every year only to tobaco related deaths? The two most harmful vices, tobacco and alchohol, are also the two most accepted.

They still will keep happening. Legal or not is just a formality.
What benefits are there to legalising them ?

Originally posted by Darth_Erebus
Yet heavy drinking is considered a Vice. Did you know alchohol related deaths are second every year only to tobaco related deaths? The two most harmful vices, tobacco and alchohol, are also the two most accepted.

I'm not sure that's fact, but it is misleading. Deaths from other causes outnumber both, greatly.

Originally posted by Lana
I understood what she meant fine, and as no one else commented on it, I take it to assume that everyone else did as well.

Which doesn't mean that she actually said it right.

Originally posted by Fire
tell that too people who lose their entire family because some drunk/high guy crashes into them

Now Drunk-Driving, and High-Driving and such should and are Illegal. But not to allow everyone to decide for themself is a bit too extreme in my opinion.

Originally posted by Darth_Erebus
Yet heavy drinking is considered a Vice. Did you know alchohol related deaths are second every year only to tobaco related deaths? The two most harmful vices, tobacco and alchohol, are also the two most accepted.

But that's jsut in absolute numbers, by percentage they are far less actually.