What about the highly addictive drugs? How should we go about them? And don't give me the shit about "self-control".
Take a look around. There is nothing stopping people getting them now and they are more dangerous because of contamination and people don't know what strength they are getting so they overdose by accident or miscalculate their tolerance, etc. The black market also inflates pricing making an addiction more difficult to maintain effectively and if they were regulated people could maintain a heroin addiction just fine without resorting to acquisitive property crime and even hold down a job at the same time. When maintained properly, a heroin addiction is not debilitating. It's debilitating if you're going into withdrawal because you can't get any product and you feel ill and constipated.
The dangers of the "highly addictive" drugs are in no way minimised by prohibition, that is a fallacy. The dangers could be minimised if the substance was properly regulated instead of proverbially brushed under the carpet.
Also NEWS FLASH: the majority of heroin and cocaine users ARE NOT addicts - plenty of people use the "highly addictive" drugs on a recreational basis without getting addicted to them. Addiction is one of those words misused to try and scare people when actually addiction, if maintained, is unproblematic. Check out caffeine junkies. Caffeine is a hard drug comparable to coca but it isn't primarily distributed in a concentrated extract form (cocaine) and is available in more convenient ways i.e. tea and coffee, chocolate
I'm saying, people stay away from drugs because they are illegal. Sure not everybody does, but a lot of people.
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;38420304]I'm saying, people stay away from drugs because they are illegal. Sure not everybody does, but a lot of people.[/QUOTE]
I doubt many people stay away from drugs purely because they are illegal
Yes, MrJazzy, some people do stay away from drugs because they are illegal but some people also take them because they are a forbidden fruit too. A lot of people turn to alcohol, which is one of the more dangerous hard drugs, instead, just because it is legal when there are other far safer substances that aren't. If cannabis/ecstasy/whatever, for example, was legalised, lots of people would switch to using it primarily and be safer as a result.
If drugs were legalised some of those people who don't take them because they are illegal would probably want to try some of them but they would be in a safer form and available from a regulated point of sale/prescription.
Alcohol is a pretty bad example of regulated sale and should be regulated far more than it is and it should be made far more clear that it is a potentially dangerous hard drug rather than "just a drink" as many sheeple foolishly believe.
I suppose you're right, I'm curious to see how a society would be affected by legal hard drugs.
Indeed, I'm also curious.
A lot would depend on implementation I think but even if poorly implemented I feel it would be better than the current black market and wipe out contamination and unknown strength and dosage if accountability for producers was held paramount.
This is pretty interesting from Guatemala: [url]http://psypressuk.com/2012/11/09/a-healthy-drug-policy-in-guatemala-and-beyond-an-interview-with-amanda-feilding-of-the-beckley-foundation/[/url]
[quote]“We have been through 50 years of policy being made from mistaken ideology. At the moment the judging of success is how many illegal drugs have we captured, how many people are in jail. Well, those are not really the indicators of success. People are caught in a misconception about drugs and think the only way to deal with them is to make prohibition stronger and stronger. Mexico shows it doesn’t work. You cannot eliminate a supply of substances if there is a demand for them. People have always changed their consciousness and have always demanded to.”[/quote]
Lots of hard drugs are legal and widely prescribed in the developed world. It's an actual drug problem. The problem isn't the drugs themselves, it's a problem with prescriptions and the general way in which it's packaged as a legal, 'safe' medicine. Some people get hooked on things that they don't need that fuck their brain up, and a lot of people get injured and can't stop taking pain killers. And there's also a lot of people who simply want to get extraordinarily high so they abuse the system.
Only the latter problem will be solved by free access to drugs in general. The first two are an issue that there's really no answer for besides education and proper treatment, and both of those things are so expensive that they could probably only be paid for by the massive revenues that could be generated by regulating and taxing drugs for recreational use.
Indeed, if you prohibit them and put them in a black market then you aren't getting any money from their sale to put towards education or treatment.
[quote]“That which is prohibited cannot easily be regulated”[/quote]
From Cannabis Policy: Moving Beyond Stalemate, a report by The Beckley Foundation
The Beckley Foundation has a lot of very interesting reports on drugs and ongoing studies/experiments.
I plan on doing a report on why I think drugs should be legalized, maybe I'll post it here afterwards.
Hell yeah drugs should be legal, but I don't care either way, I don't follow stupid laws.
[QUOTE=TehWhale;38420843]I plan on doing a report on why I think drugs should be legalized, maybe I'll post it here afterwards.[/QUOTE]
Please do, I would be delighted to read it.
[QUOTE=J Paul;38413900]I disagree. I think the only people who think this way are the people who grew up sheltered enough that they identify themselves as conservative and make moral judgement on the actions of others.[/QUOTE]
... Was that an indirect insult
[QUOTE=BFG9000;38422105]... Was that an indirect insult[/QUOTE]
When you make a stupid post, these things happen.
[QUOTE=BFG9000;38422105]... Was that an indirect insult[/QUOTE]
Not at all. I'm just saying that this type of person is a thing of the past. You shouldn't feel personally insulted because if you don't want to think this way, all you have to do is change and this doesn't apply to you. There are still people out there who think like what you described, who resist change, but there are also still illiterate people; what they share in common is they're slowly becoming less and less relevant the more we educate ourselves.
There's a reason why most of the people alive who still who think like that grew up during the 40's. This kind of thinking where people make important moral decisions based on what they've heard when they were growing up, usually accompanied by the demonization of whoever is involved the thing they've decided against morally, is a childish way of living. The old farts who honestly think this way about stuff would commonly be referred to as "set in their ways", which is [I]never[/I] a good thing. Show me one time where someone referred to someone else as "set in their ways" and it was a positive thing, and I'll give you a million dollars.
I agree with you that a lot of opinion is based on this kind of thinking, but what I'm saying is that those people are either too young to vote or so old they're going to die soon. "Well I grew up thinking this stuff was for bad people because that's what they told me" is really something that no thinking adult honestly bases a serious decision on.
Naw I mean because you called all those people "conservatives."
I'm conservative but it doesn't mean that I'm totally resistant to change...
Well back to the debate:
I guess the legalization of drugs would be O.K, maybe even good since it would probably get them out of the hands of minors but I'm still pretty skeptical of legalizing everything
Of course, you bring up the point that prohibition only directs people to the black market, but I think this can be solved.
Maybe the more dangerous and addictive drugs can be legalized, but still restricted. In order to obtain them legally one could apply to a program or something, and if they can prove that they can use drugs responsibly for a few years then they could be granted access to them after the application process is complete?
Of course there's still the problem of the black market but I think that if people had the choice between potentially contaminated and over-concentrated drugs on the black market versus waiting a year or two for legally regulated drugs of the same caliber that they would choose the latter.
Forcing people to wait years for access to something is just going to make them look for other sources in the mean time, which leads to another black market.
yes
[QUOTE=TamTamJam;38430274]Forcing people to wait years for access to something is just going to make them look for other sources in the mean time, which leads to another black market.[/QUOTE]
This. Besides, once again, how are we going to separate hard drugs from other drugs? Most drugs can be abused, and most of the drugs that are "hard drugs" can be used in small doses for mild effects. Look at cocaine. If you just use a little bit, or make something like coca tea, you still get effects, and they are very mild.
Here's my suggestion. Make them all legal. Every last drug.
Regulate manufacture and distribution. Make it illegal to resell without a license (these are the same people that would sell to minors). Supply clean equipment (syringes), and distribute the drugs in safe forms.
If the user wants to inject, give them ampoules instead of powder or other dry forms.
Direct the revenue to education programs to provide unbiased information on how to safely use the drug (including the route of administration, whether they should have another person present, and what dosage to use), the effects and duration, and any possible hazard such as dangerous drug interactions, possible side effects and reactions (such as shallow breathing, tachycardia, etc...), and whether they should avoid that drug based on existing medical conditions. They should also have contact phone numbers for more questions, or concerns, as well as the emergency phone number for that country (911 in USA).
[QUOTE=TamTamJam;38430274]Forcing people to wait years for access to something is just going to make them look for other sources in the mean time, which leads to another black market.[/QUOTE]
One of dem TL;DR guys eh?
[quote]Of course there's still the problem of the black market but I think that if people had the choice between potentially contaminated and over-concentrated drugs on the black market versus waiting a year or two for legally regulated drugs of the same caliber that they would choose the latter. [/quote]
[editline]13th November 2012[/editline]
I forgot to talk about whether illegalizing sale to minors would actually solve that problem. By the logic that has been presented throughout this thread, making something illegal only makes people more desperate (or something along those lines)
So how would we prevent this stuff from getting into the hands of minors? Legalizing drugs makes it easier than ever since even with no more black market (in theory), now kids can just ask adults to buy it for them where before they had to jump through some hoops to get it.
[QUOTE=toastman;36912851]I am not only talking about marijuana...
Should drugs be legalized ? Do the positives outweigh the negatives? Should it be your own choice to decide what you put in your body ? ...
For me, they don[B]'[/B]t only have recreational value. I see potential in the use of psychedelics, marijuana and stimulants as medicine.[/QUOTE]
In order: yes, irrelevant, and yes. One's body is one's own property. If one, through voluntary exchange or manufacture with one's own equipment and labour, comes in to possession of certain plants or substances, those would also be one's own property. Thus, to merge the two is entirely acceptable.
[QUOTE=BFG9000;38432743]One of dem TL;DR guys eh?[/QUOTE]
No, I read the whole thing, what you're not understanding is that this long wait would make people buy from other sources, most likely diverted from legitimate programs. Doing this would create a black market with the same quality of drugs that are given after the wait, the only difference is that they'll be more expensive and with the added danger of the black market.
The majority of people are going to sign up for this 'program' as soon as or after they want the drugs, not years before it.
Besides, it doesn't take "a few years" to judge whether a person is responsible enough to use a drug.
[QUOTE=BFG9000;38432743]One of dem TL;DR guys eh?
[editline]13th November 2012[/editline]
I forgot to talk about whether illegalizing sale to minors would actually solve that problem. By the logic that has been presented throughout this thread, making something illegal only makes people more desperate (or something along those lines)
So how would we prevent this stuff from getting into the hands of minors? Legalizing drugs makes it easier than ever since even with no more black market (in theory), now kids can just ask adults to buy it for them where before they had to jump through some hoops to get it.[/QUOTE]
You bring up TL;DR, but every single thing you've expressed here has been addressed so many times in this thread that I shouldn't even re-post it, but I will.
When I was in high school, and even in my last year of middle school, getting pot was incredibly easy, everyone had it. But to get alcohol, you have to do like you said, ask an adult who has legal access to get it for you. And that's not something that works out very well if you have any responsible adults around you.
However, if as a child you don't have any responsible adults around you, your problems have nothing to do with access to drugs.
[QUOTE=TamTamJam;38436349]No, I read the whole thing, what you're not understanding is that this long wait would make people buy from other sources, most likely diverted from legitimate programs. Doing this would create a black market with the same quality of drugs that are given after the wait, the only difference is that they'll be more expensive and with the added danger of the black market.
The majority of people are going to sign up for this 'program' as soon as or after they want the drugs, not years before it.
Besides, it doesn't take "a few years" to judge whether a person is responsible enough to use a drug.[/QUOTE]
Yea but in that time they can suffer the consequences of the black market. They want to beat the system, then they have to deal with an entirely different one. Its their problem now.
[QUOTE=BFG9000;38438843]Yea but in that time they can suffer the consequences of the black market. They want to beat the system, then they have to deal with an entirely different one. Its their problem now.[/QUOTE]
Why should they have to go through a waiting period if they're going to use the same substance anyway, regardless of how they obtain it? It seems like we would be forcing them to jump through hoops for no reason at all.
Yeah and recklessly endangering people whilst pretending not to know full well the risks of the black market.
Plus such a system would have to be somehow enforced (probably very poorly) by a massive government bureaucracy.
While I don't think drugs like Cocaine, Methamphetamine, and PCP should be legalized, I do believe the legalization of medical Marijuana could work and be beneficial to our country.
[QUOTE=theaceattourney;38441003]While I don't think drugs like Cocaine, Methamphetamine, and PCP should be legalized, I do believe the legalization of medical Marijuana could work and be beneficial to our country.[/QUOTE]
there should be a rule for this or something.
[QUOTE=JustExtreme;38439312]Yeah and recklessly endangering people whilst pretending not to know full well the risks of the black market.
Plus such a system would have to be somehow enforced (probably very poorly) by a massive government bureaucracy.[/QUOTE]
But wouldn't legalization of drugs in itself call for regulations which, in turn, must be kept track of by a government bureaucracy?
Since the legalization of drugs would probably create one anyway, why don't we just let them take the little extra job of enforcing a system such as the one I proposed? At least they won't be like the DMV and sit on their asses all day.
[editline]13th November 2012[/editline]
also, this system wouldn't recklessly endanger people while pretending to not know the risks of black market. Its the people's choice if they decide to use black market drugs, and if it endangers them its their responsibility. I thought you guys were against government paternalism?
Besides, the "unbiased education on drugs" that you hope for would probably include a section all about the black market and the associated risks. If people are smart enough they will stay away until a year is up.
[QUOTE=TamTamJam;38442779]there should be a rule for this or something.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, same thing over and over again with no willingness to read the thread or research the topic despite this being a "Mass Debate".
[editline]14th November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=BFG9000;38445065]But wouldn't legalization of drugs in itself call for regulations which, in turn, must be kept track of by a government bureaucracy?
Since the legalization of drugs would probably create one anyway, why don't we just let them take the little extra job of enforcing a system such as the one I proposed? At least they won't be like the DMV and sit on their asses all day.
[editline]13th November 2012[/editline]
also, this system wouldn't recklessly endanger people while pretending to not know the risks of black market. Its the people's choice if they decide to use black market drugs, and if it endangers them its their responsibility. I thought you guys were against government paternalism?
Besides, the "unbiased education on drugs" that you hope for would probably include a section all about the black market and the associated risks. If people are smart enough they will stay away until a year is up.[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure about the government bureaucracy thing really, I guess it could be fine if it replaced the current one that enforces the "locking people up = problem solved" paradigm. Not sure about the system itself you propose though.
Surely eradicating the black market as much as possible should be a more sought after option? That way less people get hurt because the regulated product is available through legitimate means that make the black market look unnecessary and like a bad deal. By knowingly keeping a black market to "discourage" users from getting anything until their vetting period is over, lots of people are endangered because they wouldn't want to wait. You can't rely on people being "smart enough" I don't think. Plenty of people are fine using the black market now so why would they postpone their access just to get on some kind of list?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.