Legalization of Drugs

[SlowwHand]

AAHZ, you're talking about the abusers, not users.

[Boris Godunov]

Yes it is. This is no different than the smoking ads of the 40s and 50s.

So you want to ban cigarettes and other tobacco products, right?

[Tiamat]

I agree with Sloww's post on first page. Legalize it and then tax it!

[Solomwi]

12th grade: home-made products, like crank

With a couple of chemistry prerequisites.

I agree with Felch, generally. Legalize it all. It's difficult to imagine the fallout being worse than that of the prohibition.

[Elok]

To people? I've used them plenty of times.

Er, that's sort of the whole bloody point of firearms, that they cause damage to people (or animals, or tin cans, et cetera). The damage is not always permanent, but it happens pretty frequently. Why exactly does this need explaining?

[Theben]

Perhaps "good addicts" exist, but I imagine they're quite rare if they do, and I've never met one.

racist

[Felch]

Smoke weed everyday, Theben.

Not that you need any encouragement. . .

[C0ckney]

whether drugs are legal or illegal, there will still be a high number of problem drug users, the real issue is how to deal with that as a society.

the way we currently deal with it as a crime problem, we lock people up for possession of drugs, we drive addicts underground, create an enormous black market, which in turn encourages serious criminality and gangsterism. it costs a vast amount of our money to have the police track the criminal networks involved in the drug trade. as well the huge costs of tackling the crime that often goes with addiction, as well as the other social problems that drug addiction creates. at the same time we offer woefully inadequate treatment services for drug addicts and fail to educate young people properly about the dangers of drugs. and so the cycle repeats, year after year, decade after decade, a never ending, un-winnable war.

the way we ought to deal with it (the economist did a very good piece on this recently), is to treat drug use as a public health problem. legalise and tax drugs, this would take all the recreational users (who make up the majority of users), who are criminalised at present and whose use is currently seen as a problem for society and make that use into a legal leisure activity and revenue source. some of the money saved could then be used to educate people and to treat addicts. this wouldn't of course solve all the problems overnight, but it would reduce the number of people in our gaols, decriminalise a large section of the population who don't cause any problems and would allow resources to be used where they are most needed, i.e. treating people with drug problems.

some will argue of course, that legalisation would cause an increase in the number of users, however the experience of portugal, which decriminalised all drug use, suggests otherwise.

others will argue the case for prohibition based on the harm that drugs cause. this view unfortunately seems to be based on ignorance and laughably limited personal experiences ('uh, i once knew a girl who used to party so much that she lost her job, so drugs are bad and should be illegal, mmmkay'). the science tells us that alcohol and tobacco cause more harm than, for example, ecstasy, lsd and marijuana (the head of the UK government's advisory council on drugs was fired recently for pointing out this fact). it's totally unjustifiable that you can walk into a shop and buy alcohol and tobacco and yet get years in gaol for possessing a less dangerous substance.

[Fake Boris]

It's interesting to see how the general mindset on drugs legalization has evolved over the years. Poly OT is an excellent exhibit.

[Kidlicious]

Some addicts are quite functional.

Only if they aren't that addicted. Drug addiction progressively destroys the brain and body. The longer you're addicted the less able you are to function normally. The drug meth, can cause addiction after one use, and drugs like PCP are very difficult to function on no matter who you are. I can personally attest to the last statement.

[Felch]

PCP isn't something you should smoke on your lunch break, that much is certain.

[Arrian]

Cockney

Prohibition isn't working, and strong arguments have been made that it's actually hurting. Increase liberty! FREEDOM! You're with me, right GOP?

-Arrian

[Elok]

Pssht. How much of our current drug-fighting efforts are wasted on incarcerating potheads and babbling gateway-drug nonsense nobody really buys? Cut that out and you'll have a lot more resources to squash the drugs that need squashing.

[Solomwi]

Cockney

Prohibition isn't working, and strong arguments have been made that it's actually hurting. Increase liberty! FREEDOM! You're with me, right GOP?

-Arrian

[Wezil]

Only if they aren't that addicted. Drug addiction progressively destroys the brain and body. The longer you're addicted the less able you are to function normally. The drug meth, can cause addiction after one use, and drugs like PCP are very difficult to function on no matter who you are. I can personally attest to the last statement.

You don't have to do a drug all day every day to be an addict.