Which drugs would you legalize?

[goatofthenever]

I don't quite understand why you would rather decriminalize but not legalize. The only difference I can see is government regulation in the purity and taxes on the drug. The only purpose is to still have street dealers?

Your other point is also one I do not understand. How can you break a law which you support? You say a drug should be illegal, yet you take that drug.

 

[GenericMind]

Yeah, I probably should have added a "Legalize none" option. Too bad I can't change the poll.

 

[DarthMom]

that is ok. the people who would pick that don't matter anyway

 

[BodhiSvaha33]

Yeah, I probably should have added a "Legalize none" option. Too bad I can't change the poll.

Since the drugs that are currently illegal are pretty much arbitrary, it would be a silly option anyway. Pot is illegal, but alcohol is legal? P. cubensis is illegal, but A. muscaria is legal? GHB is illegal, but DXM is legal? Etc.

 

[VerbalTruist]

PUBLIC?! Yo made the results public?

 

[BodhiSvaha33]

GenericMind, I understand what you're saying and I fully support treatment programs for addicts like methadone, needle exchange, even "prescription" heroin. However, this is a far cry from legalization. I don't think any society has ever tried flat-out legalizing heroin or crack, and I think the results would be very bad if they did. Imagine being able to walk into your local liquor store and pick up a bag of uncut heroin for the same price as a fifth of JD. (Hmm, did I just hear a faint sound like a million BlueLighters all screaming "YESSS!"? ) Seriously, though, substance abuse would get a lot worse than it is now, and while some people are able to function/hold down jobs/raise a family on junk, a great many can't. How many kids would go hungry because mommy would rather get her fix?

I think those of us who are drug users tend to underestimate the barriers to access experienced by "normal" citizens. A lot of people are not willing to make heroin deals in housing-project stairwells, or risk going to prison. Pull those barriers down and use would definitely go up. How much is the question. Personally, I think it'd be pretty huge, and society would not be able to easily cope.

I'm all for scaling back the drug war to apply only to serious drugs of abuse. Maybe one day we can legalize those too, but I would be a lot more comfortable taking it slow.

 

[GenericMind]

I'm all for scaling back the drug war to apply only to serious drugs of abuse. Maybe one day we can legalize those too, but I would be a lot more comfortable taking it slow.

Of course. Slow is the only way to take it. I'm certainly not advocating an overnight legalization of anything, except for maybe Cannabis.

How we legalize or decriminalize is just as important as if we legalize or decriminalize. Controlled studies on test groups, government-funded psychosocial programs, and a significant rehaul of drug educational programs would all be vital to our success.

 

[phr]

I don't think any society has ever tried flat-out legalizing heroin or crack, and I think the results would be very bad if they did.

Actually, heroin and cocaine were legal for quite some time. (I think like 25 years or so)

Seriously, though, substance abuse would get a lot worse than it is now, and while some people are able to function/hold down jobs/raise a family on junk, a great many can't.

Studies where drug laws are relaxed, and where people had access to as much heroin as they wanted, prove otherwise. Most found a stable dose and after sometime they actually started getting off of it. They simply moved on.

Sure, at first more people would use, but I think that number would stabilize. An addiction is bad, regardless if the drug is legal or not. Most people know that, and if they don't, it could be thought.



I think the main point is, what we have now is not working and is causing more harm than would be caused if drugs were legal.


I don't want to get into a legalization debate, but if you're interested, all the information is out there already. Just do a Google search. After reading some of the material out there, I'm sure that any reasonable person would agree that legalization is the right way to go.

 

[Bella Figura]

Just look at the Netherlands. If everywhere had the same (or better) policies towards drugs, it wouldn't be a such a big fucking deal.

I know its a cliche to bring this up but alcohol abuse (especially here in the UK) is through the roof and its so socially acceptable it makes me sick to be part of the human race.

Are people blind or just really stupid?

 

[mulberryman]

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.

Agreed completely. I vote nothing short of complete legalization as prohibition has absolutely no effect on peoples' behaviour at all.
Though, I suspect that disrupting the black market by ending the "war" on drugs could easily send the world economies into a complete tailspin, resulting in an economic depression the likes of which haven't been seen in over a hundred years.

 

[GenericMind]

as prohibition has absolutely no effect on peoples' behaviour at all.

That's not entirely true. Drug use has actually increased across the board since the beginning of prohibition whereas before prohibition it was remaining steady.

Though, I suspect that disrupting the black market by ending the "war" on drugs could easily send the world economies into a complete tailspin, resulting in an economic depression the likes of which haven't been seen in over a hundred years.

Something jarring would happen, that's for certain. I'm not an economist so I have no idea exactly how it would affect the world ecomony but you can be damn sure shit would be flipped completely upside down. The Third-world countries that produce the world's supply of raw materials would have to redefine their whole economies.

 

[svacheme3]

The bottom line is that prohibition does not prevent access to drugs. Period. I don't care how harmful people think some drugs are and how wrong it is for people to use them, the fact is legalization recognizes the reality that we can't use force to keep drugs away from people; anyone who wants drugs can find them, and there's zero evidence to suggest legalization would cause more people to want them, so instead we have to find a way to minimize the harm they cause. All credible evidence suggests that legalization, which in reality means regulation of a legit market, is the best way to accomplish this. People who favor this approach aren't advocating a free-for-all with crack sold alongside chewing gum; but access through a pharmacy with age requirements, bans on advertising, more preventative education based on reality, purity and safety standards, etc. The only claim you might be able to make is that more people might experiment; but so what? Those who would experiment with drugs only if they were legal are small in number and aren't the type of people who are predisposed to going beyond responsible use. The consequences of pumping hundreds of billions of dollars into violent criminal organizations and imprisoning tens of thousands of non-violent drug offenders causes FAR more damage to society than a couple more people experimenting ever could.

 

[mulberryman]

The only claim you might be able to make is that more people might experiment; but so what? Those who would experiment with drugs only if they were legal are small in number and aren't the type of people who are predisposed to going beyond responsible use.

QFT. There are people who huff paint and computer duster, or even their own shit, but they are few and far between. Believe it or not its possible to use meth responsibly, as unhealty as it is. Education is also the key here, as any educated person would know to try safer amphetamines or other stimulants entirely first. Unfortunatly, because of prohibition, meth is clearly the most available. I'd suspect ending the "war" on drugs would likely decrease most of both meth and inhalant (ab)use.

 

[mulberryman]

The fact that ending prohibition would turn the world markets upside down is a good indication of how widespread drug ("ab")use is. The cliche' that "everybody does it" is an absolute and undisputable fact. Unfortunately, the system is broken and we have entered into a never-ending cycle of prohibition-born socal decay set to rot the whole of society out from the very core, part of a vast number of such self-defeating systems careening our species toward near-extinction-level disaster.

 

[svacheme3]

QFT. There are people who huff paint and computer duster, or even their own shit, but they are few and far between. Believe it or not its possible to use meth responsibly, as unhealty as it is. Education is also the key here, as any educated person would know to try safer amphetamines or other stimulants entirely first. Unfortunatly, because of prohibition, meth is clearly the most available. I'd suspect ending the "war" on drugs would likely decrease most of both meth and inhalant (ab)use.

Absolutely. And the few people who still would use meth wouldn't have to risk all the extremely dangerous contaminants, wouldn't have to worry about not knowing the purity/dosage, would be able to get other drugs that prevent going crazy from a harsh come down, wouldn't be robbing peoples houses to pay absurd black market prices to stay high, and would have much more access to effective treatment.

 

[Slay]

all of them, everyone should have right to whatever he/she wanna score, i dont think doing drugs is a crime, its a personal thing and you dont harm other people or anything - of course when you ban the shit people try everyway to get their shit including robbing people, stealing drugs etc. i believe drug related crimes is because of the drug prohibition.

 

[mulberryman]

Phohibition is how the true criminals keep hold of the power, The carrot and stick they use to remain in control of the government and corporate world. Make no mistake, Wall Street and the whole of Washington is paved in blood and cocaine.

 

[MDPVagrant]

I would Legalie Zit. Zits shouldn't be illegal.

 

[SvnLyrBrto]

I'd legalize everything... across the board, but maybe with age limitations depending on the drug's potential for abuse. I'm thinking back to the time, from when I was about seventeen-ish until I turned 21, when it was a WHOLE lot easier to get pot acid or shrooms than it was to get booze. Heck, if I'd had the money for it, coke would have been no problem to attain. A properly licensed and taxed liquor store cares about said license, and is a lot less willing to sell to minors than illicit dealers.

That said though, I'd drop the hammer HARD on anyone who chose not to use responsibly. Drive while under the influence, hurt someone while high, engage in criminal activities to support your habit, and you WILL do HARD mutherfucking time!


cya,
john

 

[swilow]

I wouldn't legalise them, just repeal all laws controlling them. Similar to the way there are no rules on what colour clothese we wear, there should be no rules on what type of thoughts we think.