inb4 thread locked.

__________________

Not like you're going to discuss this in a serious way anyways.

To anyone who criticizes my idea: You have a better one? Legalize drugs completely? Keep drugs illegal? Make drugs more illegal?

Fact is, I understand both sides of the issue, rather than being completely leaning to one side. I understand drugs destroy communities (But pot doesn't lol), and druggies simply cannot be destroyed. It would violate the physics of the Constitution. So, here I give you: The Ultimate COMPROMISE. Giving both sides a little of what they want.

Druggies get their drugs.
And communities get their druggies the fuck out.

k, rdy4lock *hides in bomb shelter*

Nope, which is why none has been offered. I think it's healthy to know one's limitations, which means not cramming every passing thought into the knowledge gap like you're trying to fill a pothole with the contents of your trash can. The stuff you've written is the kind of thing one thinks about when they're sitting on the toilet or laying in the bathtub. We think these insane things, and immediately dismiss them as insane and only share them with other people for a laugh. You seem to be lacking that particular faculty, and pot undoubtedly has to bear some of the blame for that.

The lack of an alternative to your idea doesn't give your idea any extra weight. It might have done if your idea wasn't inherently mental. Reading your first post it's clear that you just started writing, and as you were writing these ideas just started popping into your head and then became part of the overall tapestry of nonsense which constitutes your letter to Bill.

If I'm wrong about that, and if you've thought long and hard about these ideas, then you surely must have worked out the possible [probable] problems with them. Tells us everything that could go wrong with a drug town, and how you'd deal with it. In fact, do the same for your entire letter. Be your own prosecution and see if you can pick apart your proposals, and then people might start taking them seriously if they survive.

K, I understand it would lead to massive smuggling if not attempting to smuggle.

Smuggling OUT, would be a fucking pain in the ass, since getting out would be a pain in the ass. There are different extents to this bill.

1 - Total freedom.
2 - Limited freedom, family can visit you SOMETIMES, and you could visit them rarely.
3 - Total isolation. So goodbye to everyone not in drug town where you're going, but you don't care - that's why you chose drugs. Hell, it don't even have to be a city, or a town, or a sector. Make it a fuckin' prison. Better yet, just give prisoners.. just kidding. No seriously, empty out a big ass prison and put a bunch of crackheads right in ther'.

I would probably choose limited freedom. Letting them have their own sectors, their own freedoms. Sure, the potential risk of corruption would be high, but the mentality would change.

If doing drugs are officially legal, and now it is dealing drugs to a minor that becomes the big risk-taker, cokeheads just won't give a shit, cuz they know they will get popped for that so they would rather keep their drugs risk-free. On the street TODAY, it is ALL illegal. Hey, snort illegal, may as well sell illegal, right?

Also, public opinion would change, how is dependent on variable(s).
I would keep the opinion on drugs low, but I wouldn't try to make them miserable. Hell, they'd be havin' a blast! But they would have much higher death rates in their own sectors, which is ok, because it's not in the community, and they're just hard drug users.

I've been on and off the weedz, cuz I need a job.
Last quarter at college I was way fuckin' high and WAY TOO tired, the whole damn time, and my homework was often turned in late. I got 2 A's and 1 B.