The morality of drugs


The Outsider

Recommended Posts

I hear often that drug dealers are terribly immoral because they 'push' drugs on people. Yet, people have to be responsible for themselves. To blame the drug dealer seems to take the responsibility off of the individual. The individual is destroying his own life.

Some may claim that the drug dealer doesn't trade value for value. He is trading a non value (the drugs) in exchange for a value (money). The drugs may be argued to not be a value because they do not further life. Yet, as pharmacists like to say, the poison is in the dose. The danger comes from the amount, and almost any drug can be deadly.

So, what are y'all's thoughts? Does the drug dealer act immorally by selling drugs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is kinda of a silly question, there are too many variables( define' drug dealer' someone who sells'pot' they grew to an adult? pharmacy worker who steals the chemicals from the store and sells that?), immoral 'to who'?

If you were deciding as whether or not to become a drug dealer, you should be more concerned with the legality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The illegal drug dealer reasons as follows:

I am selling a poison that destroys people's lives. This I do knowingly. I respect their choice to use the poison. I am not using force or fraud. I am not responsible for the choices other people make. I am acting within the morality of Ayn Rand, selfishly and without force or fraud. The only problem is I can't look at myself in the mirror and call myself a man. But perhaps that's not important.

The legal drug dealer (doctor) does the same thing the illegal drug dealer does, but he does it legally. He peddles a poison that destroys people's lives. But unlike the illegal drug dealer, he peddles it as something good for health, which is fraud. He is doing fraud but he gets away with fraud because he has a Dr. in front of his name and a MD after his name. MD stands for Medical Deity and most people have more faith in Medical Deities than a saint has in God.

What is the difference between a good drug and a bad drug? Ain't no difference except doctors can't make money out of bad drugs and they don't like the competition. It is easier to make them illegal than to compete. A good drug is a drug that doctors can make money out of and a bad drug is a drug that doctors can't make money out of.

Illegal drug dealers are harmless (at least to me ) because they don't force drugs on people. Legal drug dealers can be dangerous because they sometimes have the legal power to enforce drugs on people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is kinda of a silly question, there are too many variables( define' drug dealer' someone who sells'pot' they grew to an adult? pharmacy worker who steals the chemicals from the store and sells that?), immoral 'to who'?

If you were deciding as whether or not to become a drug dealer, you should be more concerned with the legality.

Good point, by drug I mean a mind altering substance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before opiates were illegal 2% of the population were opiate addicts. In today's dollars their habit cost about 50cents/day.

Today 2% of the population are opiate addicts. Their habit costs between 200-700/day. And allllll the misery and societal problems that go with it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charles,

I'm not one to start slinging around rules about it being moral to do this and immoral to do that. To me, when that frame gets rolling, it goes into Dear Abby land.

But this question of yours merits an answer.

It depends on the drug.

If you can take an animal like a rat or monkey and get it so addicted to a drug it will literally starve to death to keep getting a fix, what makes you think you are not doing the same thing to a human being with that same drug?

Humans are rational animals, not rational abstractions. If something is terribly detrimental for animals and makes them not act like animals (meaning suicidal in practice and robbed of what limited volition they do have), then by definition, it will be terribly bad for human animals and make them not act like human animals.

Supplying something you know will enslave another human is immoral--evil--to me. There are contexts where this is more flexible, but I've seen drug dealers get 6 years olds addicted to crack cocaine to keep them in line as runners.

There's no way on earth I could ever consider that anything but evil, and God knows I've bought crack from the hands of these little victims when I was addicted. More than once. Not my finest moment. In fact, I did a despicable thing doing that. If I could go back in time and undo it, I would without hesitation.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear often that drug dealers are terribly immoral because they 'push' drugs on people. Yet, people have to be responsible for themselves. To blame the drug dealer seems to take the responsibility off of the individual. The individual is destroying his own life.

Some may claim that the drug dealer doesn't trade value for value. He is trading a non value (the drugs) in exchange for a value (money). The drugs may be argued to not be a value because they do not further life. Yet, as pharmacists like to say, the poison is in the dose. The danger comes from the amount, and almost any drug can be deadly.

So, what are y'all's thoughts? Does the drug dealer act immorally by selling drugs?

No, of course not, so long as the dealer does not use fraud or force. A qualification is needed, however. Those drug dealers known as "doctors" and "pharmacists" exploit and profit from a government monopoly on the sale of drugs, so they might be vulnerable to some criticisms. But that's a muddled issue.

Ghs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's take a really bad rec. drug which tends to make people destructively crazy: methamphetamine. Absence the war on drugs, better drugs might be available without causing such damage at a much cheaper price. As it is methamphetamine is commionly available in spite of all the anti-drug efforts of the conservative fascist law enforcement agencies to the financial betterment of some really bad people. One can only speculate how much money disbursed though food stamps--formerly called--goes right into their pockets as payment. It's so easy to waste money you did not earn and so easy for one to be a victim of a drug you then become addicted to to the glory of extra appropriations for the DEA.

--Brant

welcome to the jungle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brant,

He did not ask about the legality. He asked about the morality.

But here's another drug that makes for interesting speculation on morality and legality: bath salts.

That one has turned users into literal cannibals who chew people's face off. With their teeth.

Trying to subdue people on that drug when they get violent is a bitch, too. Tasers just don't take.

That must be one hell of a high.

btw - Big pharma is too much in bed with the government for my sense of morality and legality. That is the biggest pusher of all. It may do a lot of good for humanity, but it also does a lot of immoral and outright evil stuff. Some of this steps too far to the dark side for me to say assign total moral responsibility to the user.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brant,

He did not ask about the legality. He asked about the morality.

Kudos.

But here's another drug that makes for interesting speculation on morality and legality: bath salts.

That one has turned users into literal cannibals who chew people's face off. With their teeth.

Trying to subdue people on that drug when they get violent is a bitch, too. Tasers just don't take.

That must be one hell of a high.

btw - Big pharma is too much in bed with the government for my sense of morality and legality. That is the biggest pusher of all. It may do a lot of good for humanity, but it also does a lot of immoral and outright evil stuff. Some of this steps too far to the dark side for me to say assign total moral responsibility to the user.

Michael

One must distinguish between which brain regions are excited -- neocortex vs. hindbrain, for example.

Nuance lost on your utopian Jewess Messiah, natch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brant,

He did not ask about the legality. He asked about the morality.

But here's another drug that makes for interesting speculation on morality and legality: bath salts.

That one has turned users into literal cannibals who chew people's face off. With their teeth.

Trying to subdue people on that drug when they get violent is a bitch, too. Tasers just don't take.

That must be one hell of a high.

btw - Big pharma is too much in bed with the government for my sense of morality and legality. That is the biggest pusher of all. It may do a lot of good for humanity, but it also does a lot of immoral and outright evil stuff. Some of this steps too far to the dark side for me to say assign total moral responsibility to the user.

Michael

The legality-morality bifurcation is artificial, but, yes, selling some types of illegal drugs is immoral capitalizing on a more general immorality; it has to do with certain harm being done, such as addicting six-year olds to crack or encouraging people to commit property crimes to pay for their habit.

Some meth is being cut with bath salts. And yes, Tasers can be a joke for their ineffectiveness.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear often that drug dealers are terribly immoral because they 'push' drugs on people. Yet, people have to be responsible for themselves. To blame the drug dealer seems to take the responsibility off of the individual. The individual is destroying his own life.

Some may claim that the drug dealer doesn't trade value for value. He is trading a non value (the drugs) in exchange for a value (money). The drugs may be argued to not be a value because they do not further life. Yet, as pharmacists like to say, the poison is in the dose. The danger comes from the amount, and almost any drug can be deadly.

So, what are y'all's thoughts? Does the drug dealer act immorally by selling drugs?

Any one who sells or gives potent narcotics to children who do not know the dangers deserves to be capped on the spot.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nuance lost on your utopian Jewess Messiah, natch

What is my utopian Jewess Messiah?

Oh, I don't know. I advocate for independent thought without kowtowing to "authorities". Who needs a Big Brother (Mother)?

I might be wrong about that tho.

Brant?

He is male, not Jewish and certainly not a messiah.

Bob maybe?

He's Jewish.

Not exactly what I would call messiah material...

Michael

lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nuance lost on your utopian Jewess Messiah, natch

What is my utopian Jewess Messiah?

Brant?

He is male, not Jewish and certainly not a messiah.

Bob maybe?

He's Jewish.

Not exactly what I would call messiah material...

Michael

But I've come a lot in my life.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear often that drug dealers are terribly immoral because they 'push' drugs on people. Yet, people have to be responsible for themselves. To blame the drug dealer seems to take the responsibility off of the individual. The individual is destroying his own life.

You described it well...

The pusher is only opportunistically taking advantage of a preexisting situation which is the doper's need for drugs. They both belong to the same world because their values match, and so they do business. It's perfect moral justice that each fully deserves the other.

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take a look at your masthead.

Ayn Rand?

That makes her a messiah? On OL?!!!

To you her distinguishing characteristic is that she was a "Jewess"? Do you realize what that sounds like when you say it about a person who had little contact with the Jewish culture?

I'll give you the utopian part. She was that.

Now... are we going to start this bigoted stuff all over again? If it does go back there, I'm not even going to wait to fix the problem. You've already shown your intent before and I'm not eternal to keep wading through crap. I've got better things to do.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nuance lost on your utopian Jewess Messiah, natch.

Ayn Rand is a good example of why the Jews are God's chosen people. By the strength of her character she has brought goodness into so many lives...

...even long after she is gone.

That is an extra-ordinary amount of personal power. :smile:

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now