http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8221599.stm
huh. there is still hope for humanity.

I'm for making all drugs legal... just make sure that people are on a list as users so they don't cause my medical insurance to go up (assuming they're using without a dr's rx). And the moment someone is caught driving or operating any sort of heavy machinery (AKA putting someone else in danger) while high, they get a bullet in the head. No if's and's or but's, no trial beyond a simple blood test to see what their THC level is. Click, Bang, 25 cent solution. (And yes I think this should apply to drunk drivers as well)
I don't really care what you do to yourself, as long as it doesn't adversely affect me. Also, the moment you put someone I care about in danger, I want you dead. Because anyone that's going to drive high or drunk is too stupid to live, and should be forced out of the gene pool.

<slow clap>
Amazing, a government/court with some semblance of common sense. Our own courts could learn something from the Argentine courts, at least as far as the state regulation of morality goes. Bravo, Argentina, bravo.

That's one country with a happy population.

I think is stupid that tobacco and alcohol are legal while marijuana isn't.

Yuor ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter

I have to say, I pretty much agree. But I'm one degree less extreme, even if I think people taking this stuff are several kinds of mad.
Instead of the bullet, anyone on anything that affects that ability negatively that may impact others immediately becomes the lowest priority.
You better hope someone doesn't have a stubbed-toe/papercut/a bit of the sniffles, as they are so far ahead on the queue your chances are none if you're ssomehow high.
Not concerned about that? Go ahead!

*chuckle* I've been told by multiple people that I should setup a blog or something for my political and society rants. I guess I have a way with getting a point across or looking at things from an angle that wasn't considered before. Oh well, maybe someday.
The only extreme part is if they're actively and directly putting someone in danger. The list of users I figure will just go to insurance companies and they'll have to pay higher premiums. Kinda like someone has to pay more for life insurance if they're a high risk person (smokes and drinks regularly). Also make drugs legal but put a TON of taxes on them, kinda like cigarettes are now. Sure you can legally get them, but you'll be paying 3x as much for them as well.

Sure. And next let's also bring back the one where we chop off the hands of people caught stealing a loaf of bread and so on...
After all, radical and extreme positions/solutions are so...practical, aren't they ? Boy, they do save alot of time trying to figure out how and why things actually happen. And let's face it, radicalism and extremism in whatever form, they never really lead to any 'bad stuff' anyway, right ?
What's the difference between someone who accidentaly kills someone while driving high and someone who does the same sober while speeding ?
Does the guy with the leaded foot also gets the 25 cent solution in your utopia or what ? If you ask me he deserves it more, since he is fully aware of the fact that he's putting other lives in danger.

Driving high is a great idea. Everybody should do it.

As for cutting off hands because of stealing, last I checked stealing a loaf of bread didn't directly kill someone.
As for speeding, assuming they're in the "reckless driving" stage of speeding (which in the US is 25 MPH over the posted speed limit (I believe, maybe 20)), sure let off them as well. The world has an over population problem anyways, lets find ways of culling the herd so to speak. You endanger other people lives, what right do you have to continue to do so?
Now answer this, how many deaths are caused by speeding and nothing else (No drugs, no alcohol, nothing but someone speeding).
I love how some people constantly defend drunk drivers. It's a sad fact that the drunk usually survives the crash. It'd at least be fair if they had as much of a chance of dying as the victims. Also I can almost guarantee that no one that defends drunk drivers has ever been at the scene of a car accident that's been caused by one.

As for cutting off hands because of stealing, last I checked stealing a loaf of bread didn't directly kill someone.
The 'cutting off hands' was just to illustrate how ridiculous any radical solutions are...
The world has an over population problem anyways, lets find ways of culling the herd so to speak. You endanger other people lives, what right do you have to continue to do so?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Oh, so your solution to overpopulation is killing people ? Guilty people ? That's not very original now is it ?
Now answer this, how many deaths are caused by speeding and nothing else (No drugs, no alcohol, nothing but someone speeding).
I don't know and i don't really care. As long as there's just one i have to consider what punishment i'm going to give that guy since i'm executing all the guys who drive high or drunk, right ?
I love how some people constantly defend drunk drivers. It's a sad fact that the drunk usually survives the crash. It'd at least be fair if they had as much of a chance of dying as the victims. Also I can almost guarantee that no one that defends drunk drivers has ever been at the scene of a car accident that's been caused by one.
Excuse me ? Where did i defend them ? It seems to me your lacking a bit in the arguments department and trying to move the discussion towards a more personnal tone. I could do the same by arguing that somwone who advocates your solution never had to deal with a friend or relative having a drinking problem or a substance abuse one, but i'm not going to...
I'm not defending people who drive while beeing drunk or high, I'm just pointing out how your 'let's kill the guilty people cause we need the room' utopia stinks.

Stealing and killing are two VERY different things, and trying to say that the punishment for both should be the same is ridiculous and radical. You were the one that lumped them together, not I.
Never said it was a utopia at all, a utopia would be the complete removal of both the drugs/alcohol and the desire for them (but that's a WHOLE different issue).
What I'm saying is that the people that want drugs legalized and use them need to also be ultimately responsible for how they use them. Like I said before, you want to use them in a way that doesn't endanger anyone else at all, go right ahead, I'll defend your right to do so until the bitter end. But the moment you endanger someone else, that's where your rights end. “Your right to swing your fist stops where my face begins.”
As for never having to deal with someone with a substance abuse problem? You'd be wrong there. I've had to deal with family members that had severe drinking problems, I also had to deal with someone I loved showing up at the front door sobbing on the ground because she was so strung out on coke that she couldn't manage to use her key to unlock the door. So for your information, yes, I've seen both sides, and I still stand firm in my belief on the punishment.
I'm not saying we should execute people because we need the room, I'm saying we should execute those that are putting people at a VERY high state of risk, and some would say even attempting to kill others. Can you tell me of a single reason why someone would NEED to drive while drunk or high? You have the munchies? Fine, have a pizza delivered. It's a medical emergency? That's what 911 and ambulances are for. There's never a suitable reason for someone to drive while impaired like that.
Oh and just to head off another argument you're bound to have, yes I think the right to drive in general is given out too freely. People should be required to take a driving test every year or at least every two years in order to continue to have a license. Too many people out there don't know how to drive, or no longer possess the physical capabilities to do so.

SInce there are no if's and's or but's, i'm guessing they take a bullet in the back of the head and that's that. Boy, that does save lots of time...and money. And as a bonus we're solving the overpopulation problem. Yes, i think i'm starting to see the light...

Never said it was a utopia at all
No kidding...

I'm not saying we should execute people because we need the room.
Really ?
"The world has an over population problem anyways, lets find ways of culling the herd so to speak."
What's all this then ?
...yes, I've seen both sides, and I still stand firm in my belief on the punishment.
I've been at the scene of a car accident caused by drunk driving and i still stand firm in my belief that your idea of punishement sucks...
Can you tell me of a single reason why someone would NEED to drive while drunk or high?
Yes, i can certainly envision a couple of scenarios where someone would have to. Too bad that they'll never get a chance to explain us why cause they're busy being executed...