>>121615263You would probably do better to read up on history of usage than ask anons.
Historically moralism was a big deal (American prohibition and European temperance movements) and still is (Eastern Europe's gay rights versus Christian families is a similar example not based on facts).
Also historically economic politics, image related, the Skeleton Army was founded and funded to by business to "fight" the Salvation Army's anti-alcohol movement.
>If you treat addiction as a health problem and regulate how drugs are producedNot that simple.
Ignoring the "big pharma" political lobbying and the feedback loop of politicians say drugs are bad->people vote for party that dislikes drugs->politicians say drugs are bad, you have to consider the medical industry isn't always there to help addiction. For example you can say Americans and their opioid use is regulated. And essential oils. And homeopathy. And "traditional" chinese """medicine""" made from donkey skin fat, sea cucumbers and tiger bones. A dismal view, yes, but they exist to profit through unhealthy means.
Probably the only way "all drugs" will become legal is through a political movement that randomly values drugs (but not to help people) or politicians jumping on a new voter bloc that happens to be users.
>>121621734>Stupid fucking reasoningTry a different argument than "Just because it kills other people doesn't mean it'll kill me".
>Speed limitsWe do in built up areas. Even less near schools and in parking lots. Driving fast is for commute & freight, not giving you a high. People want to believe AI cars will be a magic bullet for road deaths. Please don't relate transit and recreation.
>and addicts that can't use it responsibility should be discardedHow can you responsibly use a harmful substance? How can you responsibly discard people who get hooked on shit? I know your political view but responsibility is a bad word to explain it to others who prefer intervention over independence and privacy.
