Legalization of drugs

Before you post I would urge you to consider both sides of the issue. Before you vote I would like you to read my post if you care, even though it is very long, as I'll admit.
Since the argument of drug prohibition is rarely discussed (as most people assume that the current drug laws are there for good reasons) it would be wise to educate yourself on the matter.

To start things off, I'm going to postulate these ideas:

1/ My body is my own possession, therefore I should be allowed to ingest any substance I desire whether it is sugar, coffee or cocaine, without fear of imprisonment. It is not the role of the government to decide what I can and cannot do with my own body. Why should so many peaceful, non-violent, and otherwise law-abiding drug users have to spend the majority of their lives with murderers, rapists and pedophiles? This is the moral argument of liberty. In my opinion this is the simplest argument but seems the hardest for most people to understand. If this argument doesn't persuade you then please consider the practical (consequentalist) justification:

2/ By making particular drugs illegal, there are serious negative consequences. Consider the what happened in America in the 1920's during the Prohibition era, when alcohol was made illegal. It is common knowledge that the 'noble experiment' of prohibition was a complete failure. Crime and corruption ruled entire cities. The demand for alcohol increased, as its illegality made it more exciting. The fact that it was illegal did little to stem availability. Izzy Einstein, a prohibition agent, filed a report to his superiors on how easy it was to find alcohol after arriving in a new city.
- Chicago : 21 Minutes - Atlanta : 17 minutes - Pittsburg : 11 minutes - New Orleans : 35 seconds (he was offered a bottle of whisky by his taxi driver when he asked where he could get a drink)

Most high-school teenagers report (in surveys, I don't have the source but it shouldn't be hard to find) that it is easier to purchase cannabis than alcohol. Mostly because the dealer won't ID you, and also because despite regulations and attempts to control drug supply and use, they are still found in every city!
Whenever there is demand for a product, it becomes profitable to sell it. If that product happens to be illegal, the profits increase, as do the risks. But crime will always be ready to meet that demand. Al Capone, aka 'Scarface', once said 'Prohibition is a business. All I do is supply a public demand'. This is why illegal drugs are notoriously surrounded by crime and violence when tobacco etc aren't. The law, of course, isn't willing to protect their business, so smugglers take the law into their own hands, using gun violence to protect their businesses. This is the direct cause of the tragic 'drug wars' in Mexico. If drugs were legalized, the 'war' could not happen. Criminals who profit from drug supply would be out of business. Extremist groups (terrorists) who profit from selling drugs would lose an important source of revenue.

Furthermore, drugs have what economists refer to as an 'inelastic demand'. This means that when supply is reduced and price increased, demand for the product is not changed. So basically, people will always want drugs. By the Government trying to reduce the demand by seizing drugs (thereby increasing the price but decreasing the supply), they ultimately fail, as this only increases the profits for other dealers who readily have plentiful supplies and plenty of users to sell to. Drug dealers support the drug war. By making drugs illegal more problems arise than any good.

When drugs are made illegal the purity and potency vary massively. Ecstasy and amphetamine are infamous for the number of adulterants used, ranging from paracetamol to meth. A user of illegal drugs rarely knows for sure what he or she is actually taking. This makes the risks of drug use profoundly more extreme. The risk of overdose from pure, medical grade heroin is pretty much nil, assuming the user desires a recreational dose and doesn't want to commit suicide. For most illegal drugs there is actually a wide margin between the desirable dose and deadly dose. The problem is that most users actually have no idea how much pure drug material there actually is in their purchase. They may be used to taking such and such an amount of heroin for the desired effect, and upon the purchase of a new batch, inadvertently inject themselves with intolerable amounts, because of the purity of the second lot being so much higher.

There are also risks from the adulterants themselves, since they are often left-over chemicals from an incomplete synthesisation process. Such chemicals are often very toxic. Sometimes, drugs are mislabelled entirely, and often a user who thinks they are taking MDMA (ecstasy) are actually ingesting something else, such as the highly dangerous PMA. PMA is a very good example of this point. It takes a good ten or so minutes longer than ecstasy for the effects to be felt, but it also has a much lower threshold for overdose, as it is an MAOI as well as a serotonin re-uptake inhibitor. Even though one pill of PMA is enough to cause deadly effects, the situation becomes worsened when someone who has ingested PMA takes a different ecstasy pill, or another PMA pill, believing the PMA pill to be a dud. This decision is almost always fatal, as PMA interacts with MDMA (ecstasy), speed and other phenethylamines, causing serotonin syndrome, hyperintensive crisis and heart attacks. While it took a bit of sciencey babble to explain, I don't think the point is particularly complicated.

If currently illicit drugs were legalized this problem would not occur either, because of standards controls. I think it's fair to say that there are more adverse health effects from drugs when they are illegal than when they are legal. Add on top of that all the other arguments, I don't see why people still think that it's sensible to try to ban drugs. I think it's something to do with the 'ban it' mentality of liberal fascism today. Swearing is bad+Think of the children>Ban it! Video games are bad + think of the children>ban it! I know that's a bit simplistic but unfortunately that's the way the world can work these days. But I digress

If drugs were legalized, regulated, and taxed (although as a Libertarian I cannot say I fully agree with taxes), the government would no longer have to spend millions on the 'drug war'. America's prisons are already overcrowded, and yet roughly a third (if I remember correctly) of all convicts are imprisoned for drug sentences. Apart from money being saved in that respect, money could also be gained from the taxing of all drugs, allowing for even more money to be diverted to help with other, more important issues. In this time of economic doom and gloom, it is hard to deny that this would be greatly appreciated and useful. Addiction rates for drugs have remained at .3% of the total population for a century - despite government campaigns and efforts. Millions of dollars of taxpayer's money is wasted to support a harmful and counterproductive 'war'. Let's face it, we were wrong. I do not condone the use of drugs and will readily admit the harmful effects that many of them have, but I believe that it is worse to do as we have been for so long. Tobacco and alcohol are legal and regulated, and it would be unfair to say that society has dissolved into destruction, anarchy and poverty as a result. Why would the currently illegal drugs be any different?
If drugs were legalized, people would not start taking them just because they were legal. In fact, probably fewer would take them, for mostly psychological reasons. (A good example to cite is the Netherlands, when referring to how legalization affects usage). I doubt there are many who would try cocaine just because it became legal. We all know that it is still potentially harmful and can induce addiction in many users.

What do you think?

(It would also be nice to see drug information cleared up - at the present many organisations insist on giving disinformation, which can only do more harm than good, and often does. People should be able to know what they are taking so that they can make an informed decision.)

 

I couldn't have said it any better. I don't even care if a lot of potential bad things from drug legalization happened (though most of them are nonsense), to me, it's an ethical outrage that somebody presumes to tell me what I can put in my body.

 

I agree that it's our body, but some of these drugs impair the person and can be dangerous behind the wheel. I only agree with legalization of Marijuana for now.

 

What's the difference between legalizing weed and say....cocaine?
Sure, lots of drugs can be dangerous if you drive, but surely that shouldn't be a reason to keep them illegal, right?

 

Take alcohol for an example...
I think that Marijuana should be legalized, but have restrictions on it just like alcohol does, I think that seems fair.

 

Why should a drug like marijuana become restricted such as alcohol. The effects of marijuana aren't as severe as consuming alcohol. If you look at the cat scan of someone who heavily drinks alcohol on a daily basis you can see that alcohol has some serious damage in such a short time unlike marijuana.​

 

Because it will help with the abuse of it.

 

Obviously it's a reason to keep them illegal. I honestly don't care if someone goes and smokes in their bedroom with a buddy or two. Although if they go drive around the city and end up killing people, well, we have a problem.

Yes, I know you'll all say "what about alcohol?" The fact of the matter is we shouldn't make additional drugs legal based on how the law currently views drinking. This sort of behavior only leads to more hazards on the roads.

 

He's talking about drugs in general. I'd love to hear this argument when you tell me that alcohol is work that crystal meth, cocaine, etc. Sure, weed doesn't have addictive properties and most likely won't give you long term health issues. However, you may go in saying "I'll only smoke weed", but how long will that last until you're experimenting with other addictive drugs and then it's down a bad path.

Well stated. I vote no to this.

Not to mention, if these drugs became "legal" people are going to avoid the hefty taxes that will be placed on them and "illegally" sell these seemingly "legal" drugs. For example, moon shiners with alcohol. So you can't say it will reduce crime either.

 

I agree, that's definitely a problem, and they should be charged with vehicular manslaughter, or whatever it is. Still though, drugs surely aren't always bad. Like you said, it doesn't hurt anybody if someone uses drugs at home. And certainly some great music has been composed under their influence.

I think what you're trying to say is that since x substance can cause people to do some certain bad thing, x should be illegal yeah? I would disagree because you are hurting all the people who use x responsibly and argue that you should simply jail the people committing the crimes.

 

Are you seriously trying to use the fact that drug addicts endanger the lives and well being of other people to change a drug addict's mind? Drug addicts have no more sense of right and wrong than a murderer. Their minds just don't work like a normal person's mind.

 

To be honest that's a moot point - the majority of all alcohol and tobacco is traded legally, so it would not be unfair to assume that drugs will be the same on this issue. People would rather consume a clean, safe (as far as drugs can be), and standardised product, than an illegal bootleg of dubious origin. Can any of you say that you drink illegally distilled alcohol, and more importantly, would ever want to, when you have a better option? Any problems with people trying to avoid taxes is to do with tax evasion and taxes themselves, not the taxed product.
At the moment, all illegal drugs are untaxed, so crime is responsible for their entire distribution. By contrast, if almost all legalised drugs that are sold were taxed, they would not be sold through the hands of criminals, except in less common cases where it is smuggled to avoid taxes. It would drastically decrease crime, not just including drug-related crime.

Are you seriously trying to tell me that drug addicts have no morality? This is clearly not the case - if it was, all drug addicts would be murderers and rapists (etc). Most drug addicts do care about other people actually; do you think that just because someone is has a cocaine habit or w/e their mind is suddenly altered, so that they cannot feel empathy etc? Do you think they suddenly become unable to give a shit about others? I don't know how to phrase it other than you're wrong. Do you really have any real evidence that when a person is hooked on 'drugs', they lose their 'sense of right and wrong'?

Your statements just underline how little you know of human psychology and drugs in general. Even worse, you are treating all drugs as one physical entity. There are actually many different types of drugs, with widely varying effects. Alcohol is a drug, as most people know. Do alcohol addicts suddenly, upon becoming dependent, not care whether their mother dies the next day? Whether they have run over an animal on the road or seen an gruesome accident? No! Of course not. They care just as much as any other human being. There is no switch in the brain that decides whether or not someone cares about others depending on whether they are addicted to any particular substance!

Responding to the more general argument of intoxication while driving; it would, of course, be punished to a similar extent as driving while drunk. People aren't going to decide that it's okay to drive while on whatever drug they like just because the drugs themselves are legal! It's still unsafe, irresponsible, and endangering the lives of others.

Thanks for all the input so far! It feels good to try to sort out these issues. I believe there is a massive misconception which has been largely harbored by government and media propaganda. Drugs are the forbidden fruit!

 

imagine people popping heroin in the cafe, horrible.

NO for sure

 

Weed isn't technically abused. The way that alcohol works is that after several drinks you begin to make bad choices. One of those bad choices would be to continue to consume more alcohol until you body can no longer take it anymore and there for you pass out. Marijuana on the other hand can't be abused as alcohol can. When you smoke marijuana your lungs tell you when you have consumed too much, that is why it's very hard to overdose on marijuana. The word abuse I feel is just a matter of opinion from the eyes of the viewer. ​

I've never said alcohol is worst than drugs such as crystal methamphetamine, cocaine, etc., but alcohol is known as the "gateway drug". This means after consuming alcohol your mind wouldn't be stable enough to tell yourself not to take this drug. I know plenty of people who has marijuana on a daily basis and smokes on a daily basis and it has never came across their mind to try a different drug such as crystal methamphetamine. The drug you decide to use depends on personal preference. What most people don't understand about drugs such as cocaine and such is that the reason people constantly abuse them and continue to use them is because they're always chasing for that first hit. If you speak to any former addict and ask them "Why did you continue to abuse?", they would probably all answer "I was chasing after that first hit.". Basically when they first tried the drug, they got special high that they would never feel again, and therefore they continue to try and try to get that same hit but they'll never get it.​

How many people do you know would rather drink illegal moon shine than alcohol purchased at a store? There are always people who decides to make their own bootleg version of something legit, it's the way of life. Just because people will make their own drugs and still continue to sell at lower prices doesn't mean everyone will go to that person for their product. That is like paying a roofing company who has a history of doing poorly on their job for cheap than paying a roofing company who has a good history for a few dollars extra. Just because it's bootleg and cheap doesn't necessarily mean it's good so a lot of people would rather stick to the legal drugs that they know whats in them.​

What is the difference between someone using heroin in a cafe and someone consuming alcohol in a cafe? There are certain laws that prohibits consumptions of alcohol in public places and I'm sure if these drugs were legalized there would be some boundaries that shouldn't be passed such as consuming in public places. Besides, wouldn't consuming heroin in a cafe be safer for the consumer than doing it in their own home? What would they do if they overdose in their own home and no one is there to assist them? A close overdose may change their mind on the drug and they could stop using it afterward. ​

No offense but that makes no sense. FourFeetOver is right. Just because someone decides to consume a certain drug doesn't mean their minds aren't like a normal persons. I know tons of people who consume marijuana and are smarter than me, aren't violent, and are just "stable". If you consume a drug and decide to kill someone just shows that your mind was unstable from the start before you decided to use the drug. If you look into the histories of wars, you would see that before a big battle soldiers were giving drugs such as alcohol to consume so that when they reached into battle they would be "fearless". The consumption of drugs doesn't alter the mind into doing something. It's the mind state before the consumption that matters.​

 

In the same way that people don't drink and in cafes and public (at least in my country), people wouldn't just shoot up wherever they liked. People often assume that if drugs were legalized there would be no restrictions on when or where they are used. People wouldn't be able to use cocaine or amphetamines to cheat in professional sport, for example.

 

meh cigs are worse then pot legalize that shit (pot)
or make cigs illegal they need to be same

 

I agree with you to the extent that the laws should be consistent. But what is your opinion of other drugs such as LSD, cocaine and GHB, as examples?

 

People are under this spell of thinking that legalization of something means people will do something more. If they legalized heroin, would you do it? If yes, would you do if it was illegal? People will do what they want no matter what the government says, period. The people who will be stoners are stoners now, and coke heads will do coke no matter what a little piece of paper tell them to.


People also seem to think drugs have been illegal in America for a long period of time. They haven't (opium wars shit aside). Everything started with prohibition of alcohol. People then realized they needed a constitutional amendment to prohibit use of a substance, so they got the amendment they needed. Just a few years later, they realized the organized crime and unenforceable nature of the law was insane, so they repealed the amendment. Then along comes marijuana. It was banned because it made "black men seek relationships with white women" was responsible for "satanic music like swing and jazz." Dupont wanted a monopoly of the fiber industry, so they used peoples' racial fear of negros to get it banned. I can't make this shit up people, look for yourself.

Heroin was legal from 1890 - 1910 as a non-addictive substitue to morphine for its painkilling and cough suppressing properties. It was made illegal in 1914. Marijuana was made illegal in 1937. Only in 1970 was cocaine made illegal. Drug prohibition REALLY picked up with Reagan's "just say no" policy.

 

Although, certain things you put in your body can cause you to harm/negatively affect other people, (driving while drunk or high, being high on crack in public, having thousands more O'Ding on crack and heroine and filling up our hospitals, domestic and public violence either to satisfy addiction or as a cause of being high) so that's why even though it's your own body, your body is part of a society and if things you are ingesting are causing you to harm others, it's a problem.

 

It's a really good Idea, that people can snort the white lines, and work productively in our society, but unfortunately, consuming "high level drugs" ruins your life, it makes it so your sole need is to get another high. you will do pretty much anything from blowing a cabdriver to breaking in homes of honest citizens. If people were capable of doing what they want because this is you body, and work in this society than we would not need the laws in the first place. It's not like our Congress decided that this new drug, Cocaine, was unsafe, and dangerous as soon as it came out. Cocaine was out many years before it was outlawed, because of the observations that when some one becomes addicted to cocaine it could endanger the life of others, and themselves. I don't want to see anyone get hurt or hurt anyone else for euphoria. When any actions endanger others, and self, that is when people should outlaw it. As for your body being personal property; I own myself right, no one can take that away from me. I also own my car, I like to drive fast, everywhere. well if I own my car and myself what is stopping me from driving fast. the law is, to prevent me from increasing the chance of accident, which could harm someone else, and would harm myself.