If you're really against War on Drugs, that should include new alcohol/tobacco restrictions. T/F?

[Blue3]

If you're really against the War on Drugs, that should include being against new and stricter alcohol/tobacco restrictions. True or False?

[Big Abraham]

True, raising cigarette taxes disproportionately hurts low-income and black/brown areas, just like the drug war does.

Let people control their bodies ffs, rather than having the state profit off of Big Tobacco.

[darklordoftech]

I’m not sure why people who want criminal justice reform and legal marijuana aren’t pushing for it to be legal to drink alcoholic beverages in public. It’s legal in most countries that don’t have Sharia Law.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

I agree, New Zealand is starting a new prohibition era but of tobacco products.

The most damaging for your health when smoking a joint is the tobacco usually.

However i'm strict with use in cars as that can damage other people, but that applies for everything, drugs as well.

But you do at home what you want, unless other people are threatened (agression after exaggerated use of alcohol for example). Responsible use should be allowed, but with general precautions and focus on education of those products.

[CEO Mindset]

Yes.

[sting in the rafters]

My primary issue with the "bodily autonomy" argument is the significant risks of second-hand smoke for the respiratory system of those who are otherwise not exposed to it. Ditto for the significant negative externalities of alcoholism. Consequently preventative measures which deter usage of tobacco/alcohol prove beneficial to quality of life in the long run due to lower healthcare costs and increased life-expectancy. The reason the same doesn't apply to weed/psychs is with the exception of accidentally leaving the lights on because you passed out fried or psychs requiring a trip-sitter there isn't the inherent burden placed on other individuals. Granted showing up to work after-baked is 100x more detrimental to productivity than showing up hungover so exercise good judgement.

Excise taxes are indeed regressive, as Big Abraham implied the tax isn't as effective towards higher-income consumers of cigars/cigarillos/rolling tobacco who have the means to afford such a burden. Even though higher prices are statistically an effective preventative measure, they merely incentivize the black market and selling of loosies. The state has a pretty dubious incentive to profit off Big Tobacco as most federal/state taxes go towards either healthcare or preventative measures, though this may be another situation which illustrates the need for a universal healthcare system.

Ultimately the "War On Drugs" method of addressing drug addiction as a personal issue has failed, it needs to be addressed as a public health crisis and a disease. Ask why do people start ripping cigs or drinking in the first place? After all, substance abuse is but one of the many symptoms of the poverty which gives my neighborhood a lower life expectancy than North Korea.


Tl;dr: Generally in terms of criminal penalties/taxation however not in terms of societal stigma and substance abuse treatment