So, you don't believe in collective wisdom that sees that certain regulations and preventive measures that can prevent much larger costs, by stopping things before they start.  So, in regards to protecting citizens from themselves, is that not what law enforcement is about?

Law enforcement is there to protect you from your neighbors and others with in your country. Not sure what regulations you mean, there are so many. Some regulation is ok, minimal regulation. Most of what we have now is not. A lot of it removes personal responsibilty, and leads to people having no need to think or plan for themselves. I dont think that is good, and will in the long run be bad for people. It is already showing in the US population. With most people not caring about their health because it doesnt cost them money, someone else will foot the bill. Personal responsibility is a good thing, choosing to help others is a good thing, having these things forced upon you removes their value.

But when your personal irresponsibility can create a hell of a lot of public problems (like through irresponsible environmental practices, not caring about the health or welfare of your employees, refusing to get health insurance and having no plan for when disaster strikes), does this not fall under the same mantle of police-like responsibility? If you have a dangerous, attractive nuisance on your lawn, it's natural for the police to stop by and tell you to remove it before somebody gets hurt. Same thing if you're using lead-based paints in children's toys.

I was about to post something similar. I look through this thread and I see why we are doomed. You have Democrats blaming Republicans and Republicans blaming Democrats.  When will people learn that both parties are to blame and they use wedge issues to keep us separated. The idea that a sole ideology is correct and a my way or the highway philosophy is a way to get things accomplished is ridiculous.

Those who cry out for more "freedom" and don't want "big bad government" oppressing them, end up not seeing the collective harm their own person conduct can have.  They operate under the presumptions they can exist alone and it not impact others.  And others who do get harme, they want contained so they can blow themselves up, because fundamental to their view of freedom is that freedom must be maximized in order to allow people to even choose death.  See, who are you to tell others they can't have lead in their paint?

In the prior post I responded to, I did ask what this "government" thing is, because it was spoken how there is mayhem where there is little or no government.  On that note, I had to ask what was expected of government and what it was.  Apparently it ends up being a totally subjective, "just enough so problems get avoided".

Not a heavy smoker anymore, but legalize marijuana and see lots of profit from taxes.

You know.  I don't think you'd see HUGE profits from Marijuana.  Though would save a LOT due to the war on drugs being over.

The profit Margin on Marijuana really isn't that great i'm lead to believe, hence why people see Marijuana as a "Gateway"drug.  It sort of is.... because Drug Dealers are always trying to "upsell" you on something more serious they're holding because they want a higher profit margin and Marijuana they mostly just sell to smooth out revenue/allow upselling/gain connections in drug culture to friends who might use harder stuff.  While others in the "Franchise" system sell mostly just to pay their dues in hopes of making up.  Selling Marijuana in a franchise type situation actually won't make you anymore money then working at McDonalds!

Policy wise you want things to be around street level or lower. (espiecally for more high profit drugs) otherwise you end up with a lot of black market out there still.

To get some real taxation profits the government would probably have to legalize the harder stuff... and that's unlikely to happen because a lot of the harder stuff has such a high markup, people would be REALLY uncomfortable with how cheap it would have to be to make sure a black market doesn't spring up.

We're talking Heroin and Cocaine cheaper then Cigarrettes.

If US government wants to cut spending, this is the start i think. Not only would tax revenue be collected from marijuana but you would save money in police and prison costs too, as the number of prisoners falls dramatically. Around 750000 prisoners would be freed if it was legalised, a huge reduction in prison population. That's bound to save some money US government don't have

An argument floated on the political forum here, and also by various folks on the conservative side is, if you legalize drugs, you have to get rid of the welfare system.  There has to be very harsh negative consequences, or if you offer welfare, you end up not deterring people from actually doing drugs.  Legalize drugs, and let word that drugs killed people get out, so that people get too scared to do it, and the market would work.  Well, that is along the lines of reasoning.  

Ain't that the same for all conservatives? just to scare people into doing what they want?

My only problem which i just released, is if pot was legalised how would all these prisoners find a livelihood, there are few jobs and adding so many more people to it, would be a huge problem.

But i'm not sure what Holland did, but it's not popular at all to smoke pot there. It's mostly foreigners who smoke it there. They actively sell the stuff in shops as well, although it's much more expensive than tabacco.