It's not the same logic. Weed isn't a contagious disease responsible for probably the majority of last year's deaths, and if you overdose on heroin, your neighbours' grandparents won't also die of a heroin overdose. There are plenty of problems with drugs, but that ain't one.

Now, banning smoking in public, that I can get behind. I don't want none of that nasty second-hand smoke.

Well, directly there are no negative implications, but indirectly very many.

I do not want to finance health insurance for drug addicts, for example. And yes, I agree, also smoking should be banned and the health insurance limited.

Sorry, but not sorry for having a conservative stand. You _must_ accept my opinion instead of downvoting... I thought that Pluralism of Opinions is a valued concept in democracies...

> I do not want to finance health insurance for drug addicts

I do not want to finance health insurance for you. But I have a healthy understanding of risk sharing and know I am better off with more people, yourself included, in my risk pool, than with less.

> I do not want to finance health insurance for drug addicts

Rehabilitation of drug addicts is, iirc, cheaper than the policing and economic (inc. opportunity) costs they tend to otherwise cause. The health insurance system can't natively deal with this kind of thing, but a decent healthcare system supporting drug addicts would cost you less.

You already help to finance things for drug addicts, though - and provide similar things for people that aren't actually addicts but sent to treatment because they got caught with drugs. Or worse, you are paying for jail and punishment for folks that decided they wanted to do LSD twice a year. Or get high on the weekends.

Also, I do not have to accept your opinion. Not every opinion is valid nor should every opinion be considered. For example, I can ignore anti-vaccine sentiments, white nationalism, and serious flat earth bs without investigating further.

Genuinely curious, how old are you? don't want the exact number rounded up or down to the nearest multiple of 10 is fine.

40

thanks!

>Democracy assumes rational people and people with responsibility. We see now how well it all works.

That's got nothing to do with whether people are in a Democracy at all. It's not even to do with whether the society is individualistic or collectivist. It's more to do populist messaging and how they are spread.

Well, we would need to elect a strong leader in that case that helps us with our immaturity.

... booooom, millions of people dead.

... or we could look at countries that did indeed legalize drug use completely and are successful with it.