Legalise Heroin Now!

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Dis
ice cream isn't even psychologically addictive!

This is why I did not continue the earlier debate. It's pointless.

When I became lactose intolerant, I had no problem giving up ice cream.

It has no addictive qualities as all. And ice cream does not directly cause diabetes, so that argument is bunk.

that is all.

But you aren't a food addict. Maybe you don't have an addictive personality at all. Sure most people can give up ice cream anytime, but then there are some who can not.

[Spec]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I think you get addicted to all of those things overnight. I'm sure about the cocain and cigarettes.

Oh come on... I did cocain like 20 times in my life and was buzzed as hell, never got addicted.

Spec

[MOBIUS]

Further proof that drugs should be legalised: Alcohol is more harmful than heroin or crack, according to a study published in medical journal the Lancet.

Why is heroin even illegal when the abuse of alcohol is far more dangerous to society...?

What about Cocaine? It it is only on a par with Tobacco in terms of its danger to society, why are we spending countless billions of $$$ trying to suppress its distribution and sale in our countries when legalising it would save a swathe of Latin nations from brutal murders and political unrest?

Not to mention the fact that, as per the OP, legalising heroin would cut the Taliban's chief revenue earner right from under them...?

It's total common sense that these drugs must be legalised at the earliest possible opportunity!

[OneFootInTheGrave]

it may be common sense, but common sense does not rule the world... IMO there is too much money to be made avoiding government scrutiny and IRS for it to get legalized.

[Al B. Sure!]

Further proof that drugs should be legalised: Alcohol is more harmful than heroin or crack, according to a study published in medical journal the Lancet.

Why is heroin even illegal when the abuse of alcohol is far more dangerous to society...?

What about Cocaine? It it is only on a par with Tobacco in terms of its danger to society, why are we spending countless billions of $$$ trying to suppress its distribution and sale in our countries when legalising it would save a swathe of Latin nations from brutal murders and political unrest?

Not to mention the fact that, as per the OP, legalising heroin would cut the Taliban's chief revenue earner right from under them...?

It's total common sense that these drugs must be legalised at the earliest possible opportunity!

All I see is a case for Prohibition there

But also this:

Prof Nutt told the BBC: "Overall, alcohol is the most harmful drug because it's so widely used.

"Crack cocaine is more addictive than alcohol but because alcohol is so widely used there are hundreds of thousands of people who crave alcohol every day, and those people will go to extraordinary lengths to get it."

So yeah. I guess you drug legalizers want crack to be as common as alcohol.

[MOBIUS]

So what you're saying is that alcohol should be banned as well!?

[Elok]

No, that doesn't necessarily follow. I have a drink every now and then, but I have zero interest in cocaine, and would continue to have zero interest even if it were legal. And I imagine many other people feel the same way for the same reason: alcohol is, in fact, safer in terms of its effects. That "study" Moby cited is misleading, because it refers to the absolute harm done by all the drugs in question, without regard to their prevalence. Well, if three-quarters of your country (or more) partakes of one substance at least some of the time, and maybe one in ten has ever so much as tried most of the others..

XPost

[Al B. Sure!]

Yes.

[Al B. Sure!]

No, that doesn't necessarily follow. I have a drink every now and then, but I have zero interest in cocaine, and would continue to have zero interest even if it were legal. And I imagine many other people feel the same way for the same reason: alcohol is, in fact, safer in terms of its effects. That "study" Moby cited is misleading, because it refers to the absolute harm done by all the drugs in question, without regard to their prevalence. Well, if three-quarters of your country (or more) partakes of one substance at least some of the time, and maybe one in ten has ever so much as tried most of the others..

XPost

Yeah but the other one is illegal. Laws try to serve as deterrents, right?

[Elok]

They try. Don't always succeed. Certainly the "no alcohol under 21" rule is a farce. Ditto our efforts to control marijuana. MJ is much more popular than coke. Do you think that's because the penalties for being caught with pot are lighter? I don't. I think it has to do with pot being less dangerous and having more desirable effects. Possibly it's cheaper, too, I have no idea what they cost. That's the one way decriminalizing drugs might noticeably encourage their use--they'll make prices drop like a (crack)rock.

[C0ckney]

that post was so good, the server thought we needed to see it twice.

[C0ckney]

where did those numbers come from elok? a source perhaps? the only problem i can see with the study is that it handles the effect of each drug individually, rather than the effects of drugs combined (for example i think in the majority of cases for heroin users, they will also use other drugs like alcohol, weed and maybe also crack).

the real issue is that whether drugs are illegal or legal we're going to have a lot of problem users. it then becomes a problem of how you deal with that. the approach we take with alcohol and cigarettes, that is to tax them and then treat addiction to them as a public health problem. with drugs, we treat it as a crime problem, we create a gigantic black market which is obviously filled with criminals and gangsters, and we push both casual users and addicts underground. while it might be argued that the first approach is somewhat hypocritical ("don't smoke, it's very bad for you and here's 50 reasons why! but feel free to purchase cigarettes at any store"), there is no doubt in my mind that it a better approach.

the amount of money that could be raised through legalisation and taxation is truly astronomical and if you used even a fraction of that money to fund proper education programs for people and proper treatment for addicts, then you would have a much better situation than today. for users and society in general.

[Al B. Sure!]

Possibly it's cheaper, too, I have no idea what they cost.

Yes, weed is cheaper than cocaine, Elok

Typically, selling weed is more profitable than cocaine, though.

[MOBIUS]

where did those numbers come from elok? a source perhaps? the only problem i can see with the study is that it handles the effect of each drug individually, rather than the effects of drugs combined (for example i think in the majority of cases for heroin users, they will also use other drugs like alcohol, weed and maybe also crack).

the real issue is that whether drugs are illegal or legal we're going to have a lot of problem users. it then becomes a problem of how you deal with that. the approach we take with alcohol and cigarettes, that is to tax them and then treat addiction to them as a public health problem. with drugs, we treat it as a crime problem, we create a gigantic black market which is obviously filled with criminals and gangsters, and we push both casual users and addicts underground. while it might be argued that the first approach is somewhat hypocritical ("don't smoke, it's very bad for you and here's 50 reasons why! but feel free to purchase cigarettes at any store"), there is no doubt in my mind that it a better approach.

the amount of money that could be raised through legalisation and taxation is truly astronomical and if you used even a fraction of that money to fund proper education programs for people and proper treatment for addicts, then you would have a much better situation than today. for users and society in general.

[Al B. Sure!]

Admit it, Mobius. You just want to be able to get your nose candy without having to deal with the shady dudes in the bad parts of Cardiff.