The War on Drugs is Useless

[dtugg]

Nice try. I'm pointing out that you're shooting yourself in the foot with the argument that smack will be just like ciggies and grog when these legalized drugs are huge social problems.

If you don't think they should be illegal, your position is inconsistent and hypocritical assuming you have ever used either.

Anyway, I was just countering your strawman that the government would be the drug dealer.

There are already problems with youths carrying knives. So let's scrap the restrictions and say you can carry all the knives you want.

Now you're equating children carrying knives with drugs? Please...

If we don't ban it then people won't do it eh?

What?

What about the personal freedom of people who don't want to live amongst scores of violent, whacked out, socially useless drug addicts?

You have no evidence whatsoever that this number would be greater if drugs were legal. Any if these people do anything that harms others, they should be put in jail. But the act of using drugs doesn't harm anybody but perhaps the user.

What about people who don't want to get hit by a driver on crack?

With that logic, we should ban alcohol in order to protect people from getting hit by drunk drivers. No...wait, we do the sensible thing and make drunk driving illegal.

Uh, yeah. The legal drugs are far more abused than the illegal ones.

All that proves is that they are more socially acceptable.

No but there's more people in the world than just me.

So you're saying that you're better than other people?

And billions of dollars goes into health care costs of both legal and illegal drugs. This would increase by several magnitudes.

Prove it.

And besides with drugs legal, the billions of dollars that go to fighting the un-winnable war against them could be instead used for treatment. Same for the billions in tax revenue that would be generated.

Thousands and thousands of lives are ruined by the needle.

Sure. And making drugs illegal hasn't stopped that at all.

You think you have the right to tell society what they have to tolerate.

People should be allowed to do whatever they want as long as they are not harming anyone else. The act of using drugs does not harm anybody else.

They have to tolerate violent meth heads.

If they are violent, of course not.

They have to tolerate coke fiends.

If the cokeheads are not harming anybody it is none of anybody's business. And no being a cokehead doesn't automatically mean that you are going to hurt people. I've known cokeheads. Mostly, they just sit around at home and do coke all day.

They have to tolerate streets full of people shooting **** up and leaving dirty needles around. Have a look at "Needle Park", a park in Switzerland where the authorities turned a blind eye to heroin use. Tell me if that's what you'd like the streets to be.

There is no reason that you would have to tolerate that. Just require people to use in private. Hell, the US you can't even drink in public most places.

 

[Lallante]

Nice try. I'm pointing out that you're shooting yourself in the foot with the argument that smack will be just like ciggies and grog when these legalized drugs are huge social problems.

When you say "nice try" do you mean you will just ignore his question because it shows the underlying flaw in your arguments?

Should alcohol and tobacco be legal? Why should they be treated more favourably than, say, cannabis and ecstasy (which both have vastly lower abuse potential)?

There are already problems with youths carrying knives. So let's scrap the restrictions and say you can carry all the knives you want. If we don't ban it then people won't do it eh?

In what way is this a legitimate argument?

What about the personal freedom of people who don't want to live amongst scores of violent, whacked out, socially useless drug addicts? What about people who don't want to get hit by a driver on crack?

In what way would controlled legalisation make any of these (supposed) problems greater? You are assuming controlled legalisation = vastly greater abuse, when all available evidence shows the opposite (heroin trials in scotland, cannabis in the netherlands etc).

Uh, yeah. The legal drugs are far more abused than the illegal ones.

Yes they are. Educate yourself on this topic before you spew your bile. Niccotine alone accounts for many orders of magnitude more death and cost to society than all recreational illegal drugs put together.

And billions of dollars goes into health care costs of both legal and illegal drugs. This would increase by several magnitudes.

citation? Controlled legalisation is a harm reduction measure. It would see both increased funding for health care AND reduced cost, as evidenced by the results of controlled heroin clinics in scotland.

Thousands and thousands of lives are ruined by the needle. You think you have the right to tell society what they have to tolerate. They have to tolerate violent meth heads. They have to tolerate coke fiends. They have to tolerate streets full of people shooting **** up and leaving dirty needles around. Have a look at "Needle Park", a park in Switzerland where the authorities turned a blind eye to heroin use. Tell me if that's what you'd like the streets to be.

The reason Needle Park is full of druggies is precisely because of prohibition -> they are forced to concentrate there!

 

[Bikewer]

There has been a lot of talk in the media of late of various legalization/decriminalization schemes mostly as both a money-saving and a tax-generating measure. With state budgets strapped, incarceration and enforcement are both seen as expensive options.

Cheaper "drug courts" and the possibility of legalizing and taxing marijuana are starting to be appealing.
As one in law enforcement for a long time, I can attest that the "drug war" has been spectacularly unsuccessful.
At some point, if we are really serious about trying to control recreational drugs, we must address the root problem of demand.

 

[Alt+F4]

On the other hand, it is a fact that because of people like you, billions of dollars goes into the hands of ruthless criminals who don't think twice about killing anybody that get's in their way.

My worry is what these ruthless criminals are going to move on to if drugs are decriminalized. They certainly arent going to stop being criminals and since they don't think twice about killing those who get in their way what private company would risk taking them on in drug sales?

 

[3point14]

My worry is what these ruthless criminals are going to move on to if drugs are decriminalized. They certainly arent going to stop being criminals and since they don't think twice about killing those who get in their way what private company would risk taking them on in drug sales?

A fair point, but they would at least be able to afford fewer guns, bullets and henchmen if the current system didn't provide them with an astonishingly good way of making money.

 

[dtugg]

My worry is what these ruthless criminals are going to move on to if drugs are decriminalized.

Whatever it would be it certainly would not be as profitable as selling drugs. And less profit, less incentive to be a criminal.

They certainly arent going to stop being criminals and since they don't think twice about killing those who get in their way what private company would risk taking them on in drug sales?

During prohibition in the US, ruthless criminals like Al Capone controlled the distribution and sale of alcohol in the US. After it was repealed, private companies somehow worked up the courage to sell booze.

 

[Virus]

So you think that companies are going to start selling crystal meth? If a guy buys it and bashes his wife's face in and ends up in a mental institution can he sue the company for damages? Or will you make smack companies legally immune from the massive amounts of damage their product will inevitably cause?

What other products that send people insane should companies start selling?

 

[dtugg]

So you think that companies are going to start selling crystal meth?

Companies already sell methamphetamine under the brand name Desoxyn.

If a guy buys it and bashes his wife's face in and ends up in a mental institution can he sue the company for damages? Or will you make smack companies legally immune from the massive amounts of damage their product will inevitably cause?

What other products that send people insane should companies start selling?

If a guy buys some alcohol and bashes his wife's face in and ends up in a mental institution can he sue the company for damages?

Anyway, in the US you can sue anybody for anything as long as you pay the filing fee. Winning is a different story. If I were on this hypothetical jury, I wouldn't award this hypothetical guy a dime. If you ask me, if you abuse a drug to the point that you hurt other people and go insane it is nobody's fault but your own.

 

[Lallante]

At some point, if we are really serious about trying to control recreational drugs, we must address the root problem of demand.

What problem? In what way is demand for drugs a problem?

Abuse of drugs and drug addiction (much like abuse and addiction to painkillers, alcohol, fast-food, television) is a problem. Use of drugs is a recreation.

 

[Virus]

Companies already sell methamphetamine under the brand name Desoxyn.

So Desoxyn all round? No questions asked? How about benzodiazapine? Free for all on that? What's the point having prescriptions if you can buy PCP over the counter?

If a guy buys some alcohol and bashes his wife's face in and ends up in a mental institution can he sue the company for damages?

So in other words, no. But if I were you, I'd steer clear of alcohol analogies because they don't work in your favor. We know that alcohol is incredibly destructive and you want more of that destruction.

Anyway, in the US you can sue anybody for anything as long as you pay the filing fee. Winning is a different story. If I were on this hypothetical jury, I wouldn't award this hypothetical guy a dime. If you ask me, if you abuse a drug to the point that you hurt other people and go insane it is nobody's fault but your own.

Ok so we'll legalize the sale of things that send people insane, ruin lives and kill people and we'll have a cavalier attitude about it. That should solve everything.

 

[Lallante]

So Desoxyn all round? No questions asked? How about benzodiazapine? Free for all on that? What's the point having prescriptions if you can buy PCP over the counter?

Straw man. Legalising drugs doesnt mean handing them out indiscriminately.

So in other words, no. But if I were you, I'd steer clear of alcohol analogies because they don't work in your favor. We know that alcohol is incredibly destructive and you want more of that destruction.

Answer the question: do you think tobacco and alcohol should be illegal? How about saturated fat? Opioid pain killers? cars? guns? (easy one) combat knifes? bow-and-arrows? bear traps? poisons of any kind?

Lots of things have the potential for destruction. It isn't societies job to pick a random handful and rule them off limits because of media-stoked and completely disproportionate fears.

Ok so we'll legalize the sale of things that send people insane, ruin lives and kill people and we'll have a cavalier attitude about it. That should solve everything.

Nice rational arguement skills you have there bud. Not at all hysterical straw-man based rhetoric.

 

[hgc]

I know a retired drug enforcement cop who once told me that pretty much everything he and his colleagues have ever done in their career regarding Drug Prohibition was bunk. He said nothing they did enforcing drug laws ever made a difference.

It made some difference. It gave them a job.

That's why it's so hard to kill the drug war. It's big business. All the billions being spent on this wasted effort is going somewhere. Then there's the asset seizure scam to consider. You can bet that those on the receiving end -- police, prosecutors, defense bar, private prison interests, judiciary -- aren't going to go down without a fight.

Of course, the drug traffickers, for whatever influence they have, need the drug war to sustain a profitable business.

Nice to hear one of them fessing up after retirement, though.

 

[Virus]

Straw man. Legalising drugs doesnt mean handing them out indiscriminately.

Ok. So there are controls on it. Who gets access to PCP? What are the controls? Doesn't the establishment of controls create the black market?

Answer the question: do you think tobacco and alcohol should be illegal? How about saturated fat? Opioid pain killers? cars? guns? (easy one) combat knifes? bow-and-arrows? bear traps? poisons of any kind?

Sorry. Not letting you bait me with red-herrings.

Lots of things have the potential for destruction. It isn't societies job to pick a random handful and rule them off limits because of media-stoked and completely disproportionate fears.

Ah, so the problems caused by drugs aren't actually real. It's just something the media dreamed up. Actually it is societies job to rule harmful things off-limits.

 

[Aoidoi]

I can't help but notice that the latest round of celebrity overdoses all seem to have been done using legal drugs.

I'm not sure if that's an argument for or against legalization, honestly.

 

[Bikewer]

By the "problem" of demand I mean that I wonder about the basic reality here. Why do human beings need to intoxicate themselves. Obviously, this has been done by a fairly large segment of the population since the first time Ooog found those pretty mushrooms or that that jar of fruit in the back of the cave had become rather tasty...

Naturally, not everyone "abuses" drugs in that they become addicted; though some drugs are so very addictive that they can become problematic to a very large percentage of folks that try them...(Crack and meth....Among others).
Still...Is it just part and parcel of the human condition that intoxication is attractive? Is depression more widespread among humans than is normally thought to be the case, and are people merely self-medicating. (some public-health authorities think this may be the case)

 

[bignickel]

But, but, but...

Won't SOMEONE please think of the children?!

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

Yay excluded middle.

(Seriously, I don't see serious proposals to decriminalize hard drugs, just the "softer' Ones)

 

[Dr. Keith]

There has been a lot of talk in the media of late of various legalization/decriminalization schemes mostly as both a money-saving and a tax-generating measure. With state budgets strapped, incarceration and enforcement are both seen as expensive options.

Former governor of New Mexico was on Jon Stewart just this week advocating for legalization.

As one in law enforcement for a long time, I can attest that the "drug war" has been spectacularly unsuccessful.

I also heard a rep from LEAP on a podcast recently. Very interesting.

http://www.leap.cc/cms/index.php

Seems that this could be woven into a conservative platform if you can get past the hysterical.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

I despise narcotics and the people who produce them as much as the next guy, and I have done real work to help the drug addicts (volunteered at a street magazine publishing house for almost a year recently)... and even I am slowly becoming convinced that legalization is the way to go. I used to look at legalizing marijuana as a stupid hippie thing, but lately I have come to hear actual, well thought-out arguments that go beyond "good, you just, like, gotta legalize weed, maaaan, peace out!".

Look at the impact the legal drugs have on society, tobacco and alcohol. Do you really want crystal meth added to that mess? Do you really want easily obtainable, cheap crack?

There was a time when alcohol was outlawed in the USA. This was a time of illegal underground bars, corrupted policemen, huge mafias centred around smuggling and distribution of alcohol, and all the illegal stuff like killings that came as an inevitable result of this large-scale violence. Just as we're currently seeing with narcotics, as it were.

But how much worse could it be if we legalized drugs? Can't take the risk that we would be a society of drugies, and think about what Big Pharma would do.

I know that was meant as irony, but I want to answer anyhow.

How much we want "Big Pharma", or, in fact, Big anything, from Organic to Pillows, to be able to do is something we decide upon through regulation. Norway has a state monopoly on the sale of alcoholic beverages with the exception of light stuff like beer; an 18 years age restriction on consumption of both tobacco and alcohol; a ban on cigarette ads, and a range of other measures to keep "Big Alcohol" and "Big Tobacco" in check. I fail to see how "Big Heroin" should be any different.

ETA: Then there's a nice little thing known as "prescriptions". Already we've got the state playing the part of the "drug dealer" rolleyes in Norway by prescribing Subutex to heavy, long-time users.

Answer the question: do you think tobacco and alcohol should be illegal? How about saturated fat? Opioid pain killers? cars? guns? (easy one) combat knifes? bow-and-arrows? bear traps? poisons of any kind?

Sorry. Not letting you bait me with red-herrings.

Why is this a red herring? Sure, the other ones are extreme, but tobacco and cigarettes? You're saying tobacco and alcohol are so prevalent and damaging because they are legal. Why, then, are you not for a nationwide ban on these substances?

 

[dtugg]

So Desoxyn all round? No questions asked? How about benzodiazapine? Free for all on that? What's the point having prescriptions if you can buy PCP over the counter?

I couldn't care less what other people put in their bodies.

So in other words, no.

What the matter, can't answer a simple question in return? What are you afraid of?

But if I were you, I'd steer clear of alcohol analogies because they don't work in your favor.

Actually they do. Alcohol is legal despite the fact that it is more dangerous than most illegal drugs. And inconsistent hypocrites like you for some reason are not fighting to make alcohol illegal. Presumable simply because you like to drink alcohol but don't like drugs.

We know that alcohol is incredibly destructive and you want more of that destruction.

Actually, I want people like you to stop ruining people's lives over drugs. I want people like you to stop enabling ruthless criminals from making billions of dollars a year selling drugs. I want people like you to stop wasting billions of dollars a year fighting a war that cannot be won. It is a fact that those things are happening because of people like you.

On the other hand your belief that lots more people would abuse drugs is based on nothing. Nodda. Zip.

Ok so we'll legalize the sale of things that send people insane, ruin lives and kill people and we'll have a cavalier attitude about it. That should solve everything.

Who said it would solve everything?