• Welcome Guest

    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
    Fun 💃 Threads Overdosed? Click
    D R U G   C U L T U R E

if drugs were legal, would drug use increase or decrease?

in my experience, it seems that most people don't do drugs because they don't want/are frightened of altered states of consciousness, not because it's illegal. as far as me and the users i know, the fact that drugs are illegal doesn't deter use whatsoever, just forces you to become more cautious, or possibly take drugs that are harder to detect and possibly more dangerous.

there are already people running around on crazy and potentially dangerous drug combinations, especially since oftentimes street drugs are of unknown purity and content (cuts, etc). DXM is a pretty intense legal drug, and you can now even get straight up DXM gelcaps..is there a significant portion of the population using it just because it's legal and can get you fucked up? the drug war doesn't really stamp out any drugs. it's not all that uncommon to hear of people doing mescaline and barbituates and other drugs that aren't extremely popular - there's always a niche market for it, and it's much more lucrative while it's illegal. also, there's the possibility that legalizing all drugs will take away from the "bad-ass" novelty that comes with doing illegal activities. i have heard in countries where it is more socially acceptable for young people (under 18 ) to drink alcohol, there is less underage drinking, which makes sense to me. when you're a kid, if your dad gave you a taste of his coffee in the morning, you'd probably hate it. but if he told you that you were never to taste or drink any, you'd probably be completely fascinated by it, and inclined to try/continue to do it even if you didn't like the taste, just because you were doing something you weren't supposed to.

do i think all drugs will ever be legalized? hell no. it's waaay, waaay too profitable for everyone involved. the only busting labs and dealers does is create more labs and more dealers to get busted (the push-down, pop-up effect), resulting in more and more revenue for those doing the busting. it's a fucked up, endless cycle.

hopefully cannabis will eventually be fully re-legalized. it has already been shown in the netherlands that readily available cannabis won't cause a significant increase in users. not to mention it's medicinal benefits have been proven time and time again.


also: how can you not believe that people can have a genetic predisposition to becoming addicted to a certain drug? when some people take opiates they vomit and feel dizzy for hours, or even days. when others take opiates they may feel as if they are in heaven, and are in complete bliss for hours. it's the same for any other drug. it's just simple logic; everyone has their drug of choice, which they are much more likely to get addicted to than anything else. also, some people do in fact have an "addictive personality", maybe because their brain metabolizes drugs at a different rate, or for any number of reasons that are relatively complicated and not understood as of yet. addiction is a complicated subject.
everyone has their flaws. get off your high horse, i seriously doubt that you have perfect control over yourself all the time. with some drugs, addiction and withdrawal symptoms can occur very fast (3 days or less), and a very short lapse of judgement can result in a lifelong addiction.
 
Last edited:
economically speaking, consumption would most likely increase for a short amount of time (fad phase). all things assumed equal: during this time all the people who wanted to try drugs but were afraid of the consequences, would try them. all the people who use drugs would either increase their use or become more open about their use (but not increase).

however, the bottom line remains the same:
our society is not structured to allow for this kind of thing. could you imagine a construction site where everyone was taking LSD? what if you turned up to work smacked off your head only to be annoyed by a boss who was high on speed? would murder be acceptable if you were under the influence of a heavy psychadelic and thought the person you killed was in fact a martian weilding a sawoff shotgun?

seriously, social structures would collapse. businesses would go under over night. economies would fall. buildings would literally crumble. society as we know it would cease to exist and gang wars would develop between the conservative and liberal.

legalisation is really not a great idea. especially not in a developing or developed country.
 
"economically speaking, consumption would most likely increase for a short amount of time (fad phase)."

basically my thoughts, but it would settle down after people got their kicks...
 
But can you imagine a construction site where everyone was piss drunk? How about going to work wasted? Is murder acceptable if you're just really REALLY drunk?

The same types of laws would be in effect then as they are now. Obviously, businesses wouldn't tolerate workers who were zonked at work, but someone who dropped on the weekends and exhibited no problems at work wouldn't be judged anymore than someone who drinks heavily on weekends. (At least in my dream America.)

The same thing goes for operating heavy machinery.

Besides, as far as the studies I've read show, there's no statistical difference in the capabilities of an occasional drug user and a sober person. Addicts, yes, but they are more likely to show up wasted or hung over. And the few I've seen that show otherwise are usually biased, with purposefully chosen sample sizes and subjects.

Legislation is a GREAT idea. Much like the debacle that entailed when alcohol was made illegal (How do you think most organized crime made its original money?), violent criminal organizations make their operation money on substances not readily available to the public. If no one has to seek out dealers for their chemicals (and better yet, was educated about them as well), but could buy them from a legal source, dealers would lose their income. Who is going to buy from a dealer when they can buy from their local store? Think about the way Amsterdam handles grass and shrooms. It's illegal to sell on the street, but legal with a license, meaning you keep your stuff in line. Also, dealers could not compete with an in-America market that was legal due to the costs of smuggling, keeping rival dealers away in competitive areas, so forth.

Kittyinthedark, your suggestion is great. Can you imagine how much crime related with drug-dealing would decrease if, instead of separate gangs having "turf," you went to your friendly neighborhood recreational chemist and bought what you wanted? Not only that, but purity would increase while the possibility of drugs being sold as what they were not (I point you to the DOB instead of LSD blotter problems that are beginning, rare though they are) would disappear, making safe dosing a possibility instead of a carefully calculated shot in the dark.
 
Last edited:
I am a big fan of statistics, and basically upon further investigation of what has happend in states or other countries (such as the Netherlands), after decriminlization, there was a huge increase (upto 300% in some parts) in use and consumption. Now these stats are for pot, which is a recreational drug to begin with. Do I think there will be a mass movement of heroin junkies shooting up all over the street? No. Do I think people will be dropping LSD all the time? No. I have no problems finding these drugs, usually whenever I like, and really not much of a fear of getting caught. Its just an unappealing concept to shoot up heroin. I couldn't trip 24/7. I think alot of people agree that society would be able to maintain itself. Most people are not like us.
 
Originally posted by sierra
our society is not structured to allow for this kind of thing. could you imagine a construction site where everyone was taking LSD?
Click to expand...

No. They wouldn't be able to accomplish anything and they would eventually be caught and fired.

Originally posted by sierra
what if you turned up to work smacked off your head only to be annoyed by a boss who was high on speed?
Click to expand...

You would probably be fired, depending upon your boss' attitude towards you going to work while influenced by heroin. And your boss would eventually be unable to complete his job while feeding his meth addiction.

Originally posted by sierra
would murder be acceptable if you were under the influence of a heavy psychadelic and thought the person you killed was in fact a martian weilding a sawoff shotgun?
Click to expand...

Why in the world would you think so? Is drinking and driving OK because you think you can drive properly?

A murderer influenced by LSD would be punished just as hard, if not harder, than a sober murderer.

Originally posted by sierra
seriously, social structures would collapse. businesses would go under over night. economies would fall. buildings would literally crumble. society as we know it would cease to exist and gang wars would develop between the conservative and liberal.
Click to expand...

Come on. Do you seriously believe this?

True, some businesses would collapse. They would be replaced by other businesses if demand requires it.

People would learn that drugs and work don't mix, and those who don't understand would fail just like addicts nowadays don't run large corporations.

Alcohol and cigarettes are also addictive drugs (cigarettes especially)? Why aren't the entire population smoking cigarettes? Why aren't the entire population drinking just because they can? Because most people realize that smoking is not good for your lungs and drinking alcohol to an excess would render one unable to work.

Heroin was once legal and could be bought in stores as a cough suppressant, why wasn't everyone addicted then?


To answer the original poster's question. I certainly think drug usage would increase. The availability, price and correct information about drugs would cause users to make different decisions than they do now. As to whether addiction rates would increase I'm fairly sure they would too. I believe addiction rates would increase mainly because usage increases.

Many of those now addicted to alcohol is this because of its wide availability and these alcohol addicts would probably replace their addiction with another one. Furthermore, i believe that a certain part of the population just aren't able to control themselves when using drugs. Therefore if the number of users increase addiction will increase (almost) proportionally where the only limiting factor is education/information.
 
Last edited:
I think itll decrease if the drugs become decriminalized.
Who would give a fuck if they were legal:)?
 
If drugs were legal(as they should be) I think there would be an increase in drug use and addiction but most people would not use hard drugs even if they were legalized. Drug prices would be much lower so it would be easier for an addict to support their habit without resorting to crime. Crime levels would be reduced significantly.

There would be fewer overdoses because the purity of the drugs would be known. You would not have PMA being passed off as ecstasy or 5-meo-amt as LSD. Even if drug use goes up by 50% the number of deaths would likely be much lower than they are now.

Anyone who commits a crime while high should be punished the same as a sober person. If you get high at work and it negatively impacts your job performance you would be fired. If you are able do your job well while high I see no reason why you should be fired, unless you are operating dangerous machinery.

Even though drug use would increase the overall effect on society would probably be positive. Society will not collapse just because drugs are legalized. Even if legalization had an extremely negative effect on society it would still be the right thing to do. You should be allowed to put what ever you want into your body.
 
Addictions are common, chronic, psychiatric diseases. They are recognized as diseases by all competent medical professionals. Addictions are among the most heritable of all psychiatric disorders. Some people have a genetic predisposition to become addicted to certain behaviors or substances. Someone who is predisposed to cocaine addiction is not neccesarily predisposed to alcohol addiction. Most of this is quotation or paraphrase from a current article of Nature Reviews Genetics, one of the most respected scientific publications (NRG, 6, 521-532 (2005).

The belief that addicts are the result of deficient willpower, in addition to being just plain wrong, is irresponsible. In a world where the current President of the USA endorses the teaching of Creationism to schoolchildren, it is not surprising to come across such ignorance of scientific fact.

-------

Someone said that more potent forms of drug delivery (eg. injecting heroin, snorting cocaine) were a result of prohibition. In fact, prohibition of heroin and cocaine began as a direct consequence of people injecting and snorting--not until these changes in drug delivery was the use of these drugs a major problem in the USA. There still exist many South American populations that have for hundreds of years chewed coca leaves without any need for external controls. People will develop more potent forms and methods of delivery because they want to get higher and higher, not because prohibition has incited them to get more bang for their buck.

------

Others said that people choose not to use drugs, not because they're illegal, but because they don't want altered states of consciousness. There's a good chance they don't want altered states of consciousness because they've been taught--by society and its plethora of anti-drug messages, and by the very fact that drugs are illegal--that an altered state of consciousness is undesirable and wrong. If drugs were accepted by society, ie. legal, these opinions would change. Lots of people make the illusory distinction between use of alcohol and the use of other drugs--they both alter your consciousness!

I find this subject very interesting. I hope people continue to discuss it.
 
thank you for making that last point supersnail. i believe something close to 80% of the US adult population consumes alcohol. this is proof that people are not afraid to alter their conciousness. the people who don't like to alter their conciousness actually represent a minority of the population.
 
According to a 2003 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 50.1% of Americans over age twelve have consumed at least one drink on at least one day in the last 30. The prevalence of alcohol use varies with age--the peak is 70% in the 21-22 year range.

But don't take my word for it:
http://oas.samhsa.gov/NHSDA/2k3NSDUH/2k3results.htm#ch3

Many other countries have a higher prevalence of alcohol use and abuse.
 
i think the 80% i was thinking of reffered to ever used, not current users. however thanks to supersnail you can see that the non users are in the minority.
 
I think drug use would increase. If drugs were available on the free market, they would be promoted and marketed like nobodies business. However, these drugs would be manufactured by government authorised professionals, so on a whole, drug use would be safer.
 
haven't read the whole thread as i'm lazy but u have to remember that higher rates of drug use due to legalisation doesn't necessarily mean more negative consequences. most problems tend to be created by the fact that the drugs illegal not by the drug itself
 
Originally posted by endlesseulogy
... [drugs] would be promoted and marketed like nobodies business.
Click to expand...

If drugs became legal it wouldn't automatically be legal for the manufacturers to promote and market their drug(s) freely. In many countries cigarette- and alcohol commercials are banned in almost all forms. The government could ban manufacturers of drugs from promoting their products by law (which I think should be done for both alcohol and cigarettes).
 
im not so sue about that econd poiunt youmade supersnail..myself andprety muh everyone i know that shot heroin first started by snorting, but after that grew too expensive we went to the IV method because ya needed less, better buzz, much cheaper..if we were able to procure grams of heroin for $10/gram from legal sources, the likeliness of us turning to IV is slim...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top