• Welcome Guest

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

Which drugs would you legalize?

Which drugs would you legalize?

  • Marijuana/Hashish

    Votes: 540 56.1%
  • Cocaine/Crack Cocaine

    Votes: 110 11.4%
  • Heroin

    Votes: 146 15.2%
  • Opium

    Votes: 201 20.9%
  • MDMA(Ecstasy)

    Votes: 366 38.0%
  • Gamma Hydroxy Butyrate(GHB)

    Votes: 118 12.3%
  • Ketamine

    Votes: 206 21.4%
  • Dimethyltryptamine(DMT)

    Votes: 243 25.2%
  • Psilocybin Mushrooms

    Votes: 371 38.5%
  • LSD

    Votes: 374 38.8%
  • Mescaline

    Votes: 277 28.8%
  • Phencyclidine(PCP)

    Votes: 88 9.1%
  • 2C-x Family

    Votes: 213 22.1%
  • 4-AcO Family

    Votes: 152 15.8%
  • 4-HO Family

    Votes: 151 15.7%
  • DOx Family

    Votes: 138 14.3%
  • I would legalize all drugs

    Votes: 449 46.6%

  • Total voters
    963

goatofthenever

Bluelighter
Joined
Nov 19, 2003
Messages
4,183
I was quite shocked to learn that many people in the drug community are against legalization for many drugs, that such a small minority even with drug users are pro-across the board legalization. I've even heard drug users support the laws they are breaking! I must admit I find it very hopeless when my views amongst even the users are somewhat taboo.

So, I'd like to see where everyone lies on this issue. I'd like a poll, but I'm not quite sure on how to partition the answers. Is there an option to choose witch drugs we would legalize, or can it only be one answer polls?


I support complete legalization of all drugs.
 
I support total legalization also..

I don't think someone who hasn't used is going to run out and start using something.. just because it's legal!
 
I support total legalization, and a serious increase in non-biased but nonetheless factual drug education.
 
Hate to say it... but legalization of all drugs I think would be very very bad for humanity and society. As much as I love a wide-variety of drugs, I think pot should be legal for all no prescription required and thats about it.
 
The problem here is we're not "starting from nothing", so to speak; we have an entire civilization already in place, along with misconceptions, social taboos, established patterns of drug use, crime networks, racial inequality etc.

If I could build society from the ground up, I would legalize all drugs, but the most addictive ones would be legal only for childless people who undergo voluntary sterilization. Problem solved.

As it is, I think it would be difficult, if not impossible, to successfully legalize many drugs without causing tremendous social upheaval. Marijuana clearly should be legal, psychedelics clearly should be legal, all others have pretty strong arguments against legalizing them at this moment in history.
 
Full legalization with age restrictions implemented after a shift in the government's drug educational program. If the government can spend $1.5 billion on abstinence-only programs for our teenagers they can spend something similar on educating the Nation's youths about responsible drug use and Addiction support programs.


BodhiSvaha33 said:
all others have pretty strong arguments against legalizing them at this moment in history.

Could you elaborate on that?
 
Pot and psychedelics definitely should be legal, but anything that's potentially addictive should continue to be kept in check.
 
We need a new psychadellic not yet on any drug enforcers radars on par with LSD/Mushrooms/Mesc/2C-B and use it as a platform to get all mind expanding drugs legalized. IMO, if LSD was legal now instead of in the 60s, and they were going to pass something to try to illegalize it, due to the mass access of knowledge thus eliminating more and more ignorance I don't think it would be illegalized, and if it were then massive movements would take place. IMO, with the right facts etc. in theory it should be easier to have certain psychs made legal before pot, because you really can't get addicted to them and if you can provide proof of their mind expanding properties then well..... anything else is an injustice in my book.
 
GenericMind said:
Could you elaborate on that?

I think legalizing strong opiates and strong dopaminergics (heroin and coke/crack being the classic examples) would create epidemic-level abuse. In a perfect world, where people understood the risks and used these drugs responsibly, they would be suitable for recreation. But we're not there yet. Giving hordes of emotionally unstable people unrestricted access to highly addictive drugs would ruin a lot of lives (not just the users', either).

I am very uncomfortable with this whole debate, because it feels wrong to say "it's ok for me but not for thee". On the other hand, I am fully aware that many in the US (perhaps the majority) would self-destruct on these substances. Look how many people self-destruct on alcohol and prescription meds. I guess I'm conflicted between idealism and realism on this topic.
 
One of the main reasons for the legalization of drugs is to crash out the black market which breeds violence, poverty, and billions in nontaxable dollars. If you didn't legalize all drugs this market would still exist. Most people would not pick up the meth pipe tomorrow just because it became legal. Sure there might be some users that will use more but even then there will be benefits for them. When they wake up they know that they will be able to safely get what they want at a price that will not force them to cancel their health insurance or not feed themselves. Then there is all the money we could make from taxing these substances. The benefits are endless. Legalization is good for everyone not just the users. I honestly don't see how the WOD continues and it makes me very very sad. Advocating legalization does not equal the advocation of using drugs.
 
How did the 4-AcO family get a poll choice but not amphetamine / Methamphetamine? lol is it really soooo bad that it doesn't even get the option of being legalized? ;)
 
^^^lol, I didn't even think about that until I read your post. Maybe meth really is THAT bad. Funny really
 
BodhiSvaha33 said:
I think legalizing strong opiates and strong dopaminergics (heroin and coke/crack being the classic examples) would create epidemic-level abuse. In a perfect world, where people understood the risks and used these drugs responsibly, they would be suitable for recreation. But we're not there yet. Giving hordes of emotionally unstable people unrestricted access to highly addictive drugs would ruin a lot of lives (not just the users', either).

I am very uncomfortable with this whole debate, because it feels wrong to say "it's ok for me but not for thee". On the other hand, I am fully aware that many in the US (perhaps the majority) would self-destruct on these substances. Look how many people self-destruct on alcohol and prescription meds. I guess I'm conflicted between idealism and realism on this topic.

I understand what you're saying, but there are ways to go about it that I don't think would cause an epidemic like you'd imagine.

Take Switzerland for example. They started by supplying prescribed heroin to 1100 chronic addicts along with psychosocial assistance offered through government programs. Three years later, following an evaluation of this experiment, it appeared that the mental health of the participants had improved, the number of crimes in this group had decreased and that some of the addicts had a permanent address and had found employment.

On 1 June 2006, A study was published(Incidence of heroin use in Zurich, Switzerland: a treatment case register analysis) including information on 7000 pateints which found that Switzerland's policy of offering heroin addicts substitution treatment with methadone or buprenorphine has led to a decline in the number of new heroin users in Zurich. The study found that People taking up the habit in the canton of Zurich dropped 82 percent from 850 in 1990 to 150 in 2002, as a result of policies such as needle-exchange services and methadone programs. It also showed a decrease in addicts across the board. The study was also independantly evaluated by the World Health Organization who reported:

the results of the Swiss heroin experiment have indeed been positive, with high treatment retention rates (86% after three months, 70% after 12 months, and 50% after 30 months), considerable reductions in the use of illegal drugs (heroin and cocaine) and in the level of the participants' criminal activities, substantial and stable improvements in the domains of physical health, psychological well-being, housing and employment, and a substantial reduction in the number of contacts with drug users and the drug scene in general


The Netherlands did something similar in Amsterdam and Rotterdam with parallel results. Their findings published in 2005 also estimated a total net savings to society of $12,800 euro per patient when they're legally prescribed a combination of Methadone and Heroin. Lifetime prevalence of heroin use for people ages 12+ is 1.4% in the U.S. and only 0.4% in the Netherlands. The Netherlands also has the lowest drug-related deaths per million inhabitants in all of Europe(less than 1/10th that of both Germany and Spain).



People wonder why this country's ecomony is stagnent and we're starting to lag behind powerhouses like China and the European Union. It's because we've been entrenched in a Civil War for the past 30 years; by far the most costly type of war. 80% of the Nation's entire prison population increase between 1980 and 1995 were due to Drug convictions. Over 25% of incarcerations per year since then have been from Drug convictions. We've spent over $36 billion dollars this year alone on the War on Drugs, and $45.5 billion for maintaining incarcerated drug offenders. That's $81 billions dollars not even including the the socioeconomic costs caused by the incarceration of millions of people taken out of the Nation's workforce. That's almost as much as we're spending in Iraq every single year.

I won't even get into how it's caused the cyclic creation of a permanent underclass by limiting the opportunities for education and employment of minorities. Let's just say, in my opinion, this statement:

Damien8787 said:
The benefits are endless.

Couldn't be more accurate.
 
i was going to post my opinion and say a bunch of crap, but genericmind already did it better.

all drugs.

in fact, there should never be someone in jail for any victimless crime.
 
Damien8787 said:
How did the 4-AcO family get a poll choice but not amphetamine / Methamphetamine? lol is it really soooo bad that it doesn't even get the option of being legalized? ;)

Haha, Meth is whack!

I had it on there but must have accidentally deleted it when I was switching the options around. My bad.

Tweakers feel free to cast a write-in vote. =D
 
Look like I had an unfair section of anti-legalization, good to see :).
My views for legalization for hard drug users comes from the following assumptions:

a) Whether or not it reduces the quality of life in the individual has nothing to do with the government
b) With fair competition drugs will be cheap enough to have an addiction without resorting to crime.
c) Crimes against others will still be punished, thus those who do resort to crime (from or not from drugs) will still be punished. This way the falsely created relationship that drug users -> crimes -> jail, we can have a much more meaningful created of (drug or not drug related) crime -> jail and non harmful drug users can exist outside that system.
 
Why isn't there a "I wouldn't legalize any" choice?

Sure, I'm a drug user, but it doesn't mean that I feel any of these drugs should be legalized, not even marijuana/hashish.

Well, now that I think about it, do you mean legalized or decriminalized?

I'd like to see plenty of these drugs decriminalized, but not legalized. Legalization to me means being sold freely, in shops and the like. Decriminalized meaning if you get caught with it there are no penalties, assuming you aren't breaking any other laws, like driving under the influence.
 
Top