I'm pretty sure that most users of nicotine (as smoked tobacco or in electronic cigarettes) get physiologically addicted pretty quickly, and in a pretty hard way. Though this is inconvenient to them, it usually does not bother people around, because nicotine is not a behavior-altering substance (unlike alcohol or cocaine). AFAIK, heroin is not a behavior-altering substance either. It's the lack of a dose what dangerously alters the behavior of a heroine addict (or an alcohol addict).
Since heroin is outlawed, users have far lower thresholds to pass to act unlawfully in other regards, since they feel like criminals already. A heavy nicotine addict may suffer immensely without a fix, but usually stays a lawful citizen despite it.
Take insulin: it's also intended to be used as a drug, and improper use can quickly kill you. Thats why it's a prescription-only substance, but a completely lawful one. Quite a few over-the-counter drugs can kill you, or at least severely cripple you, if used improperly. Do you think outlawing them is a good idea? (Hell, 3/4 pound of table salt, if ingested quickly, would kill you. I hope you exercise reason when adding salt to your food.)
No, of course I don't: making something illegal because it is dangerous when misused or used contrary to its intended purpose is silly. I'm not arguing that.
What I am arguing is that a substance that is created to be used in a specific manner, and causes known substantial harm when used in that manner should not be tolerated by society.
That's what a cigarette is: it's this thing that is made to be used in a way that has been shown without a shadow of a doubt to contribute to many fatal ailments in a major way.
I put heroin and meth in that category: dangerously addictive substances that are known to cause substantial harm when used as intended.
There's an enormous difference between prohibiting individual use of a dangerous drug, and allowing somebody to manufacture and sell a dangerous drug for profit. The latter troubles me deeply, and that's what I'm talking about.
Profiting off of human suffering is not something society should ever tolerate.
> you are the problem with this country.
Oh boy! Do I get a sticker?
No there isn't, if it's acceptable to consume, it's acceptable to sell; you can't allow one without the other and claim any sort of logic behind it, it's simply stupid.
> Profiting off of human suffering
And once again confusing use with abuse. Drug users are not suffering.
I don't think I'm remiss in saying that most who start using heroin do in fact get to that point, am I?
> These substances are appropriately packed, abundantly labeled with warnings — but their use is not banned.
Comparing sulphuric acid to heroin is a huge stretch for me. Sure, injecting sulphuric acid into your arm is definitely going to be a lot more harmful than heroin... but heroin is intended to be used as a drug, and is harmful when used as intended. The acid is not.