mwguy

They're about to find out that gen Z has horrible penmanship.

So victimless. That’s the definition.

Only to a selfish individualist who puts his one gain before the good of everyone else.

Examples of Victimless Crimes

There is no set definition of a victimless crime, and each person may have a different opinion about whether a criminal offense is actually victimless. Some of the common examples of actions that may be called victimless crimes include:

• ...
• Recreational drug use
• Drug possession
• ...
• Possession of contraband

Source

Please cite your source on all people believing the definition of the word being "selfish individuals".

Literally only in the opulent West and in the last few decades is it considered normal for one to slack off doing absolutely nothing usefull for the better part of the day.

Citation needed.

How dare you accurately describe me!

society itself is the victim

So victimless. That's the definition.

and defending them is a result of one's lack of self-discipline and lazyness.

Is it? It is it just reasonable to realize that millions of years of mamillian evolution have led to leisure as normal a part of the species.

no benefits,

Uppers increase brain activity.

What?

as no-one who isn't addicted to the substance will take the risk of procuring it illegally. And the ones who are addicted obviously require medical care.

More mastubatory logic there. If that were true, there would be no users of a product withing a generation of banning it.

The decrease of organised crime in drug trade is no argument, one could argue that murder should be legal since the amount of convicted murderers goes down if it is legalised.

If murders only harmed the murderer that might be the case. The use of drugs is nominally victimless. And the only decision we need to make about a popular product in a free society is do we want CVS or Walmart selling it or organized crime.

Not to mention how the ban on certain drugs in America isn't designed to lower the usage of drugs to begin with, rather simply profit off it in various ways.

It has had that effect though.

Recreational drug use serves no such purpose and only exists to numb one's mind from the outside world, and likely their troubles, this fact just is covered by pretty words about "relaxation" and such.

Many leisure activities serve no immediate purpose other than relaxation. I see you've ignored the socialization aspect of recreational drugs and their effects on the various arts too.

Also only half the drugs roughly "numb ones mind." Those are downers. Uppers increase brain activity.

The point still stands, it is a heavily mind altering substance that has no benefits when used recreationally (this is the point of the word recreational), and as such must be banned.

What? How does that point stand? That logic is heavily mastubatory at best. Most recreational activities have "no benefits" beyond the recreation itself. Banning them isn't the answer.

Banning a common activity is itself harmful. The decrease on organized crime in states that have legalized should be proof enough that the ban just doesn't fit our society.

It's an arbitrary classification that you brought up...

There is no argument for recreational drugs of any sort, and before you say it, yes this applies to alcohol too.

That's objectively untrue. Not only is it stupid when you think about it for like 45s, but just because it's an argument you might not accept doesn't mean there isn't an argument for it. Additionally, the current system (in the US) does exactly that. It schedules those mind altering drugs based on their medical applications.

Marijuana isn't an opoid. That's an actual classification of drugs. Equating Mary J to Opioids is like equating grape juice to whiskey.

I can't imagine my parents being forced to sign a piece of paper allowing my basketball coach to call be "Big ".

Anybody provide or recieve SBOMs from a SaaS product? Can I see it?

Lemmy needs a middle logical layer to really take off. If a local server moderats it as such, the default view for say /c/technology shouldn't be slit across a dozen instances. Instead it should be merged into one view.

Without it you have a bunch of largely stagnant communities.

What exactly are you arguing? That the USSR under Stalin didn't target organized religion? Or just that it couldn't have been as bad as the Nazis so Cornell West is a tankie for calling it out?