• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Would you legalise drugs?

so its not a waste of resources, especially if the license isnt a hassle to obtain, which means there wont be much reason to circumvent it in the first place
Click to expand...
I think something this unnecessary will be. There's the question of how it will be regulated. Federal? State? County? Municipality? Or a tangled bureaucratic web of all 4? The elaborate administration systems that will have to be put in place to make recreational drug consumption the least bit practical in our society will almost certainly negate any "cheaper prices" arguments that have been presented here. Look at liquor licenses. They widely range in cost and in red tape from state to state and county to county. Trust me, a heroin license is going to be 10-fold more difficult to administrate. And what about addicts? The license system will just be another small obstacle to circumvent in obtaining their drugs. By making them legal you're just bringing drugs within a more convenient reach of these people.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure about getting a license for recreational drugs, like heroin, but I can see an easy way to control the drugs with psychotherapeutic potential, like MDMA or LSD.

Run things the way they did back in the day, when the usage of those two drugs primarily WAS therapeutic. The patient enters the therapist's office, is administered the drug, and undergoes a session in which he is monitored by the therapist until he has come down. The control of the drug supply remains in the hands of the therapist the entire time.

This solves two problems. First, worry about the drug being resold by its users for recreational purposes is at a minimum, because the patients will at no point actually have posession of a supply of the drug. Second, worry about the users doing stupid or dangerou things while under the influence of the drug, or using the drug execessively, are also controlled because the therapist will keep the patient under supervision for the entire duration of the trip and determine how often the patient is safe to use the drug.

Of course, this places a vast amount of power in the hands of the therapist. In order to perform drug psychotherapy, a therapist would have to undergo special training and get a license. This training will be difficult, as part of it will require the therapist learning to have the discretion to tell which personality types will respond well and which will respond poorly or critically to the drug. Denying a license to a therapist on the basis that they are unable to show this discretion must occur, but won't make many friends in the field.
 
DJDannyUhOh said:
I think something this unnecessary will be. There's the question of how it will be regulated. Federal? State? County? Municipality? Or a tangled bureaucratic web of all 4? The elaborate administration systems that will have to be put in place to make recreational drug consumption the least bit practical in our society will almost certainly negate any "cheaper prices" arguments that have been presented here. Look at liquor licenses. They widely range in cost and in red tape from state to state and county to county. Trust me, a heroin license is going to be 10-fold more difficult to administrate. And what about addicts? The license system will just be another small obstacle to circumvent in obtaining their drugs. By making them legal you're just bringing drugs within a more convenient reach of these people.
Click to expand...
it would be the exact same thing as alcohol, except instead of a drivers license to prove your age, you have an ID showing you went to a class, which might span 1 hour * 3 sessions, free of charge (easily feasible with all of the money no longer lost to the war on drugs)

its a really simple idea really. doesnt matter which level of government performs it, though i'd hope it would be state by state, and states would have the option of restricting drugs a little further, less, w/e they want
 
i personally dont think its necessary, i think drugs could be sold like alcoohl, but people wont believe that drugs are not as disastrous as they think, and so the licensing system is a sort of middle ground. it takes care of the dangerous use from ignorance aspect, as well as all the black market problems
 
it would be the exact same thing as alcohol, except instead of a drivers license to prove your age, you have an ID showing you went to a class, which might span 1 hour * 3 sessions, free of charge (easily feasible with all of the money no longer lost to the war on drugs)
Click to expand...
So you think the money wasted on the war on drugs should go right back into the mechanism that will allow people to further destroy their health? Surely if the legalization of drugs was on the national agenda, it would be a very low priority. You think politicians and the American public alike aren't going to want that money to go to health care reform and education? We have one of the lowest literacy rates among the industrialized nations and we're going to just add to it by introducing these substances openly to the public? We also have the lowest health insurance coverage per capita and we're going to let loose substances that will just require a higher level of health maintainance?

And here's another problem with price. Virtually all of our drugs come from foreign sources. You think manufacturing them here in America will make them cheaper? You don't think much of the drug war money isn't going to be diverted in keeping them out so there remains a stable drug market here? And even if you were to outsource cheaper labor (highly educated and skilled labor - chemists, biochemists) to other countries for the production of drugs, then you would have to legalize them on a global scale. That would be a much bigger problem than just getting them legalized here.

I don't think it's quite right to compare the 1800's with the current age. Way too much shit in the world has changed. People could handle legalization, if educated and conditioned correctly (might take a decade or two).
Click to expand...
Sure it's right. Opium is physically addictive. The Chinese (behind the Japanese) are one of the most discipline cultures in the world and it's no secret why they had such a crisis when opium when legal. Culture may change in 100 years but our biology doesn't.
 
Last edited:
So you think the money wasted on the war on drugs should go right back into the mechanism that will allow people to further destroy their health? Surely if the legalization of drugs was on the national agenda, it would be a very low priority. You think politicians and the American public alike aren't going to want that money to go to health care reform and education?
Click to expand...
with all the money spent on the war on drugs (without results, actually, exacerbating current conditions) the cost for these classes/ID system would be a miniscule fraction of the money now spent ont he war on drugs
We have one of the lowest literacy rates among the industrialized nations and we're going to just add to it by introducing these substances openly to the public?
Click to expand...
i have no idea where this came from. why would an increase in drug use overall contribute to lowered literacy rates?
you would have to legalize them on a global scale
Click to expand...
this is a good point. many countries though would probably follow us. we are responsible for most of their drug laws in hte first place
 
this is a good point. many countries though would probably follow us. we are responsible for most of their drug laws in hte first place
Click to expand...
Oh sure. Just like countries follow our lead today. 8)

i have no idea where this came from. why would an increase in drug use overall contribute to lowered literacy rates?
Click to expand...
It's not so much that it contributes to it (although the majority of the pot heads I know have definitely degraded in intelligence over the years), but I think the money from the war on drugs needs to be more carefully invested in health and education other than just more useless drugs. You can't just take wasted money and throw it back into another wasted program.

(without results, actually, exacerbating current conditions) the cost for these classes/ID system would be a miniscule fraction of the money now spent ont he war on drugs
Click to expand...
You can't plan without having a contingency for those "exacerbating conditions". Otherwise we'll end up in a far more worse situation than what I originally described.
 
Last edited:
Also I would like to add.

On average, the US health care system spends 15 billion on care related to drug abuse. The war on drugs averages about 20 billion in law enforcement. (do the math - I took the averages from the web sites below - pro-drug/anti-drug/neutral opinions) Health care costs are going to rise in the event of legalization and any money spent on drug education will more than negate any fall in health care due to education, but let's be realistic - that will never happen in the realm of recreational drugs. You're looking at other costs rising in place of drug war money. The budget doesn't neatly take care of itself in the face of legalizing substances that people have show in the past cannot use responsibly.

http://www.dea.gov/demand/speakout/05so.htm
http://www.healingdaily.com/conditions/health-spending.htm
http://www.drugwarfacts.org/treatmen.htm
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/event_2004-06-26_1_message_ed.html
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/health/health_1-11.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Drugs
http://www.drugpolicy.org/homepage.cfm (several links within this one as well)
 
I just finished an 80 page research project on Drug Policy which included two essays from opposing viewpoints on the subject. They're too big to upload on here so I had to put them on yousendit (max 25 downloads or 7 days) so if anyone knows of a better place to host them please let me know. I would love to hear any thoughts/comments on either of the papers. Please note that I rather strongly disagree with the opinions presented in the first one.

Protecting America from Chemical Annihilation (19 pages, double spaced)
http://beta.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&ufid=D1B3DF2616598D80

Strategic Revisions to the American Drug Policy (12 pages, double spaced)
http://beta.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&ufid=539F8C6126B0AE10
 
What the hell is wrong with you people? How can any Bluelighter not advocate complete legalization of all drugs?

Freedom is more important than health insurance costs to any reasonable person. Why don't you creepy bastards move to China.
 
Also, most illegal drugs aren't unhealthy. Psychedelics, cannabis, and opiates are all non-toxic and completely benign. Alcohol is the MOST toxic drug, and the most widely used legal drug. Physical addiction is not a health or crime problem if you have a steady legal supply of the drug at an affordable price.
 
That's hard to say... meth is pretty damned disguisting in terms of what it can do to your body (As far as it is, saying Alcohol is the most toxic drug could be an opinion). Psychadelics have their mental downfalls, cannabis causes anxiety, opiates are addictive... Sometimes you have to look at the bads, for consideration of the people's safety.
 
Cyrus, can you answer any of these questions and cite sources? Ie. not an answer that is based on your opinion, but rather one based on scientific evidence?

1) what can meth do to your body?
2) what mental downfalls do psychedelics have?
3) how is anxiety that was consciously self-induced by taking a drug, a problem? it's a drug side effect, not a health hazard.
4) how is physical addiction a health hazard?


No, you don't have to look at other peoples' safety. People have to look out for their own safety. It's called personal responsibility for your actions. State-enforced social mores is called totalitarianism or theocracy.
 
DJDannyUhOh said:
The sad thing is that the average "joe punch-clock" here in the US doesn't posses this type of responsibility.
Click to expand...
they're going to use the drugs whether they are legal or not. it's much safer to use them while they're legal, for them and for society
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top