• 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?

You guys are all silly. Here is the correct answer.

First of all, it should not be addressed by the federal governent. Congress, Senators, Presidents, et cetera, should not say one fucking thing about abortion, murder, gambling, prostitution, drugs, marriage, and other issues not DIRECTLY AND SPECIFICALLY addressed in the Constitution of the United States. So for all of you cats who say "I like him because he supports abortion.... or legalization" is bullshit! Because it is just not an issue for them to address, and is not fair for them to interject.

That is the true intrusion of our rights, when the state is overrided. When a president injects what he thinks is right, regardless if it is.

Now, like murder and prostitution has been handled, drug legalization should be handled exactly the same way. How, you ask?

Each and every state should decide, democratically, on the issue of illegalizing or legalizing any drug that they choose to address.

Now, as for what I believe would be best. I believe almost all drugs should be legalized. Crime goes down, as drugs on the street are what is known as an "inelastic" economic item, like insulin and penicillin. What this means is that someone who needs their shit (and addict, per se) will pay the $10 for their dose, or $1,000,000 for it. If insulin suddenyl became outrageously expensive, I guarentee crime would rise in the same manner.

Communites become better. The best communities are almost always recognized by good schools. Good schools are created by good teachers and funding. Good teachers come by because of more money, which is a result of the community requesting good schools. Criminals don't exactly care for education, generally. All the sudden, as crime goes down, property values rise, money flows. A huge multilevel house will sell for $100K in a bad area, while a town house can easily reach $200K in a good neighborhood.

Drug usage will increase, 10% as said above sounds right. Overdoses and sicknesses will drastically decrease.

Oh, the reason I said "almost all drugs". I do not believe methamphetamine should be legalized, though I do not have a problem with it prescribed as a medicine. This is because of how it fucks with your sleep. You just can't sleep on it. You stay up past 24 hours, and sleep induced psychosis settles in with the meth induced psychosis. It only gets worse. And these combined with a meth crash is just ghastly. This is not something as controllable as any other drug, where the next day your ready to go to work at full performance.
 
http://drugactionnetwork.com/faq/

read all of it if you can, it's really interesting and offers good points on the legalization of all substances.

I believe everything should be legalized, even methamphetamine. So what if it fucks up your sleep? Both the depressent and stimulant class of drugs mess up sleep, the depressent class more-so. When you take depressent drugs and sleep, you sleep heavier and do not go into the REM phase of sleep. Thus, if you ever decide to quit taking depressents, it will be much harder to quit since your sleep cycle is fucked up and you keep on taking it to go back into your regular cycle.
 
There are many excellent responses here.

I think that drug use would increase slightly for a short period, and then stablize. I believe that the increase would be mostly due to curiousity on the part of those who had not tried some of these drugs, but had heard a great deal about them.

In the case of the lifting of alcohol prohibition in the United States, there was no massing increase in consumption. Drugs are an intoxicant, alcohol is an intoxicant. There is a historic event where one of them escaped prohibition without society falling apart. I am at a loss for why some have a problem seeing and understanding this fact.

Did the end of prohibition result in no problems resulting from alcohol consumption? Absolutely not. Did the fabric of society crumble? Absolutely not.

%)
 
etardedadam said:
I read that thinking you ment 80% of people use alcy on a regular basis. Ever tried im sure is around 80%.
Click to expand...

thats my fault, i was confused and it didn't make it clear.
 
It's pretty hard to say.

But what do you mean by making drugs legal? All popular drugs available to all on every corner store? Or regulated, like methadone?
 
Invalid Usename said:
There are many excellent responses here.

I think that drug use would increase slightly for a short period, and then stablize. I believe that the increase would be mostly due to curiousity on the part of those who had not tried some of these drugs, but had heard a great deal about them.

In the case of the lifting of alcohol prohibition in the United States, there was no massing increase in consumption. Drugs are an intoxicant, alcohol is an intoxicant. There is a historic event where one of them escaped prohibition without society falling apart. I am at a loss for why some have a problem seeing and understanding this fact.

Did the end of prohibition result in no problems resulting from alcohol consumption? Absolutely not. Did the fabric of society crumble? Absolutely not.

%)
Click to expand...


but alcohol is an exception because it was already wildly popular at the time of prohibition, there were never large amounts of people who had never used it. many other drugs were made illegal before their usage reached its peak and they never became ingrained in the culture. if drugs like MDMA and GHB were made legal now i'm quite sure their would be an increase in usage.
 
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?
Click to expand...

im sure youd be saying the same thing about alcohol if it were an illegal drug..... seriously what are you thinking???

legalisation is really not a great idea. especially not in a developing or developed country.
Click to expand...

umm what other sort of country is there

i think consumption might go down or even out for two reasons (after an initial fad phase, as posted earlier)

1. if you look at the alcohol prohibition, problems arose when people started drinking hard liquor instead of beer and wine (beacuse hard liquor was more economic to transport when alcoholic beverages were illegal). many people are more attracted to beer and wine than liquor... if drugs were legal, would more mild versions be sold, as is the case with alcohol, leaidng to less consumption of the actual drug since everyone buys milder versions (and perhaps less injection, you could afford to eat it instead of use it more efficiently)
2. there are many people who may not use drugs if they were socially acceptable (and these people may not use as much after prohbition ends, so even if many start using because they are now legal, perhaps it would even out)

Even though drug use would increase the overall effect on society would probably be positive. Society will not collapse just because drugs are legalized
Click to expand...

definitly, even if the use increases, the effect would be insanely positive. as more and more drugs become legalised, the population will realise how insane drug laws WERE. hopefully this will be in my lifetime

and yes society wont collapse, though the problems will be a lot worse now that they will be legalised after a period of prohibition, society will adapt of course
 
cannabis sativa said:
but alcohol is an exception because it was already wildly popular at the time of prohibition, there were never large amounts of people who had never used it. many other drugs were made illegal before their usage reached its peak and they never became ingrained in the culture. if drugs like MDMA and GHB were made legal now i'm quite sure their would be an increase in usage.
Click to expand...
It's true that alcohol has been bound up in human culture for a very long time. But you're forgetting that cannabis has been in use for over 3,000 years. Coca leaves have been used as a stimulant for eons, plant based hallucinogenics go back as far as the pre-neolithic period, and opium has in use at least as long ago as 900 BC in Assyria.

Drug use by humans is not new. What is "new" is prohibition, which introduced "the drug problem."

I don't think that humanity is a "drug sponge" waiting for an opportunity to happen. There is a long history of humans (and other mammals) utilizing intoxicants both recreationally and to induce spiritual visions and initiations.

But the real problem in gaining a clear overview of this is due to prohibitionist policy becoming intwined within the cultures upon which we have grown up in. So much so in fact, that it is almost impossible to think about it without somehow seeing it as a moral issue (whether we are pro or con).

Granted, legalization and the consequent regulation of the availability of recreational drugs would very likely show some degree of increase. And after a period of time (when the novelty wore off), we would see a decline in their use. My point was that regulated availability of recreational drugs would not produce the "prohibitionist's nightmare" (i.e., "reefer madeness") that the prohibitionists claim will occur. And that culture would simply adjust to the availability and continue on has normal.

The only thing that is new here is the introduction of a subculture which desires to micro-manage everyone else's lives. We got along just fine before they came along, and we will all be a long better off when they are gone. :D
 
If drugs were legalised, after a couple of years things would calm down and if the state controlled supply( so it wasn't glammed up advertwise)
the youngsters would find the idea mostly unappealing and things would settle into a better state of affairs.
Imagine this, alcoholics turning to heroin, a bad thing?? i think not , under proper guidance they'd be better off healthwise and less of a pain in the arse to the neighbours. Drug users may take a more sensible attitude to drugs, if they knew quality gear wouldn't be an intermittent thing, they'd be less likely to consume it like its going out of fashion.
And the amount of people dieing from ignorance and downright poisoning by unscrupulous dealers would drop dramatically.
But i would say this wouldn't i!
Zophen(idealist and blinkered junky)
 
A strange thing happened in Geneva the other year. Until the heroin experment in Switzerland - that not only methadone but also heroin could be obtained legally - was that "beginners" access to heroin became very much limited. Before there were dealers all over town, so when a kid was curious he and his pals could buy from every street corner.

But after the heroin legistation experiment, the dealers more or less disappeared. Of course! They couldn't stand around hoping for curious kids approaching them - that would certainly be lousy business. The vast majority of their former clients naturally chose to get their heroin free instead so the dealers more or less disappeared...

The truth of the swiss experiments is that a vast majority of the population - more than 70% - including cops and especially shopkeepers support it.
 
Uh, alcohol is quite an intoxicating drug and is legal. But just because it is legal doesn't mean there isn't a stigma for getting hammered in public (or private, really) or at inappropriate times, like at work. Not to mention you can still be arrested for being drunk if you are excessively so.

Obviously drug use would rise but not to the extent that some of you think it would. There would still be quite a healthy stigma against drug abuse. Hell, in my social circles, and these are circles of people who do a healthy amount of drugs, more eyebrows are raised at daily or heavy drinking than daily or heavy pot use -- and drinking is legal.

People just have to learn how to control themselves and honestly it really isn't that hard. And wasting your life away on alcohol isn't any better or worse than wasting your life away on smack or blow or meth or whatever.

I do think that there would have to be a limitation on the sales of psychedelics and other very powerful drugs though so people don't fry their brains by tripping or rolling every day. Perhaps tag it to your driver's lisence and limit it to one sale a week or something.

Prohibition will end eventually, it's just part of social and cultural evolution in my opinion. As time goes on, personal freedom increases. I expect to see marijuana decriminalized sometime in my adult life.

As for other hard drugs obviously there would have to be restrictions, etc. placed on them to prevent people from going overboard. A start would be decriminalizing for personal use leading into eventual legalization for personal use. And by personal use I mean home use.

Personally I think the best way to go in our society would be to decriminalize the drugs for personal, home use... as a first step to test the waters. Keep the drugs illegal but make them violations akin to parking or speeding tickets as a deterrent for excessive or irresponsible use.

There are many ways to make this work and in my opinion it is a matter of time. Argueing that drugs aren't bad for you is obviously a false statement, but as more and more judges, prosecuters, police chiefs and other LEOs, etc come to realize that the drug war is both a waste of resources and a violation of civil rights/personal freedoms, things will start to change. Self control is a personal responsibility and clearly prohibition doesn't work.
 
The main reason for this drug war dates back to Nixon. The strength of the DEA is so impressive that it is very hard to write legislation to legalize marijuana.

I believe that if the DEA feels like, they can break up a legal and organized marijauana protest with no need to give an explanation.
 
I hate to lend credibility to the prohibitionist argument; but I would, without a doubt, consume a MUCH larger amount of drugs on a more frequent basis, as they would be cheaper and more readily available.
 
skiforlife said:
I do think that there would have to be a limitation on the sales of psychedelics and other very powerful drugs though so people don't fry their brains by tripping or rolling every day. Perhaps tag it to your driver's lisence and limit it to one sale a week or something.

As for other hard drugs obviously there would have to be restrictions, etc. placed on them to prevent people from going overboard. A start would be decriminalizing for personal use leading into eventual legalization for personal use. And by personal use I mean home use.
Click to expand...

Where I see a flaw in your logic is why you're asserting that it's the government's responsibility to regulate a part of your life as personal as the substances that you put into your own body.
 
I don't think my use would change. I might be more inclined to dabble in opiates more but apart from that I couldn't see it changing.
 
Ok so we're going to legalise all drugs!?

Here's a loose framework I've been thinking about for sometime now, I would like to read any constructive feedback you have. If you disagree with any of my points you will need to say what you would do differently to improve it or don't waste space replying please.

Free registration of drug users by doctors, if you want to access the drugs you must be a registered user, think healthcare card. This puts users in front of medical professionals who can help those who may need other assistance with addiction etc and allow productive recreational users to enjoy their lives.

Drugs only prescribed by doctors this also allows for continual monitoring of people using and intervention if required.

Higher penalties for those found suppling or in possession of drugs without user registration.

Use of drug revenue to help those most in danger of damage from drugs, addicts etc.

Realistically free availability will result in more problems than it's worth, look at the currently available drugs like alcohol, a fairly innocuous substance in relation to many others but the more available it is the more widely it is used without safeguards and the more damage it causes...
 
I like what a bunch of you had to say, including joeriot and supersnail. I really agree with MadMan_Project about the method suggested for legalizing drugs. You see, there is one thing I would like to suggest off the bat: "Use of drug revenue to help those most in danger of damage from drugs, addicts etc." No government would ever go for that, because, if that was what the money went to, the gov't wouldnt get anything out of it. The "drug" business could easily be HUGE if legal, so if the government actually agreed to do a doctor's registration program, they would probably want the money to go towards anything they choose, not "just people most in danger of damage from drugs".(In fact, whoever would ever be in danger of damage from drugs after drugs were theoretically legalized would really have to be at their own fault). In my opinion, thats A-ok with me. If most drugs were legalized and the money from the sales went to the gov't, i really wouldnt have a problem with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top