End the War on Drugs

The complaint that legalization would result in vastly increased usage has it's flaws...If as nearly everyone says drugs are widely available...It may well be the case that everyone who wants to use them already is.
Certainly there might be more experimentation with legality, but as noted by several posters...Would this result in more or less problems than we have now?
 
Some random thoughts:

Alcohol and tobacco are barely legal. If they were, they'd be nearly free. The profits are controlled by something analogous to a drug cartel. Ethanol can be produced for about $2/gallon. The mark-up is almost 200 fold. Tobacco can be produced for a buck a pound. It costs me more than $10/oz. We are not free to consume either wherever we want.

I think the problem with those two drugs would lessen if they were 'liberated'. Maybe not at first.
Heroin and meth and coke are usually dumped into the 'bad' drug category, though all 3 could be consumed regularly by a healthy and productive person. The context is all-important. A small amount of heroin is more effective and less harmful than a large amount of acetominophen. These substances are tools, but we've become neurotic about it. The attention put on them is what makes them so desirable to so many, and so profitable.

I'd like to see the profit motive removed all together...legalization isn't enough.
Obesity is a similar problem. It will go away when poverty does, gradually. We want what we can't have, or what we didn't have as kids.

This will take awhile.
 
Bikewer said:
The complaint that legalization would result in vastly increased usage has it's flaws...If as nearly everyone says drugs are widely available...It may well be the case that everyone who wants to use them already is.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but then that could be followed by a culture change a generation later.
A new generation of curious teenagers could grow up to be a generation with more addicted adults.

Vodka is legal in Russia. Have you seen what it is doing to that country?

(BTW I am in favour of legalisation, but there is that law of unintended consequences)
 
Bikewer said:
The complaint that legalization would result in vastly increased usage has it's flaws...If as nearly everyone says drugs are widely available...It may well be the case that everyone who wants to use them already is.
Certainly there might be more experimentation with legality, but as noted by several posters...Would this result in more or less problems than we have now?
Click to expand...

I find it likely that an legalization will lead to a higher drug consumption.

How much is hard to tell, but I am sure that treating the problems it causes will be cheaper than the war on drugs* in both money and human suffering.
 
EverLastingGodStopper said:
I'm expecting to see marijuana decriminalization (if not legalization) in my lifetime, but the government should also move to direct hard drug users toward safe legal methods of using drugs (can such things even exist? We would need hard science to know for sure).
Click to expand...

I agree with this position.
 
Segnosaur said:
But, isn't it possible that if drugs were legal, then usage might increase, not necessarily from people saying "Its ok to use now that its legal", but from people who are now able to afford the drugs and/or use more?
Click to expand...

This has not been the case with de-criminalisation in European countries. For a short while, the police in the UK experimented with ignoring marijuana possession, and this did not lead to increase in use. Unfortunately, pressure from conservative groups pushed the reclassification again because "it sent the wrong message". http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2121708.stm

Portugal has decriminalised drug possession as well, and it has actually led to a decrease in consumption. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=portugal-drug-decriminalization

And of course there is Amsterdam. I have been to Amsterdam coffee shops, and they are filled with tourists, almost no locals go there. I talked to various locals, and they would never be caught dead in a coffee shop, consumption is controlled by social norms. http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/node/67
 
The "war on drugs" is a sham. Why don't we ever see "war on white collar crime?" That'll be the day.
 
EverLastingGodStopper said:
I agree that drugs should be at least decriminalized, if not legalized.
Click to expand...
Which drugs?

Cocaine is legal, in limited cases, when a doctor perscribes it, eh?

I am tired of the imprecision in this element of the public discussion. (Not your fault at all, ELGS, but your post is what got me triggered). I note that you jumped to pot almosts immediately. The environment for this dialogue is, IMO, toxic, and loaded with both memes and assumptions that detract from rational input to policy change.

The number of recreational and abused drugs is long and distinguished. Some are prescription drugs that aren't per se illegal, but ought to be limited in application under a doctor's orders. Others, like acid or ecstasy, have little to no medical application. Ice has no medical application.

"Drugs" isn't pot, yet funnily enough, any and all other drugs are offered the fig leaf of innocence that pot presents when a conversational leap like the one you made is taken. (NOt your fault, this is a pattern I've noticed for decades).

This line of thinking is either deliberately dishonest, or just a bit careless, but IMO is a weak approach to take. It is bad enough that the "War on Drugs" uses such imprecision as its flawed premise. The forces for policy change ought not be so careless, nor so imprecise.

Crack, meth, ice, cocaine, speed, ludes: each is far different in influence and side effect than pot. Heroin as well. Let's not lump pot in with cocaine, for example. There is a kinetic reasoning behind my rant here: a stoner tends to be low energy with a bit more dope, whereas a coke snorter tends to become more energized, albeit in random directions. Each presents a different risk to fellow citizens, if any. The risk mitigation strategy, or policy, needs to take that into account.

LSD, DMT, ecstasy.

Again, different effects and different side effects.

I thus ask, vainly no doubt, for a bit more precision in framing the discussion.

Drugs does not equal pot. Pot is a very small subset of drugs. That pot is used, over used, and abused as a symbol of what is wrong with drug laws is itself what is wrong with the attempts to deal with, and change, the flawed policy of "War On Drugs."

ETA: also, what quarky said. (Missed it the first time through page 2).

DR
 
Last edited:
Darth Rotor said:
Which drugs?

Cocaine is legal, in limited cases, when a doctor perscribes it, eh?

I am tired of the imprecision in this element of the public discussion. (Not your fault at all, ELGS, but your post is what got me triggered). I note that you jumped to pot almosts immediately. The environment for this dialogue is, IMO, toxic, and loaded with both memes and assumptions that detract from rational input to policy change.
Click to expand...

I meant "all drugs." I do not think that drug prohibition prevents drug use. I think marginalizing drug users by criminalizing their behavior rather than treating it as a medical issue is not an effective method of deterring or controlling drug use.

Therefore, all drug use should be decriminalized. Furthermore, marijuana should be completely legalized, including cultivation.
 
EverLastingGodStopper said:
I meant "all drugs." I do not think that drug prohibition prevents drug use. I think marginalizing drug users by criminalizing their behavior rather than treating it as a medical issue is not an effective method of deterring or controlling drug use.

Therefore, all drug use should be decriminalized. Furthermore, marijuana should be completely legalized, including cultivation.
Click to expand...

This.

Anyone who wants to can get heroin or crack or cocaine this weekend.

In fact, at 4am on the Toronto streets these are easier to get than alcohol - and they dont ask for ID.
 
EverLastingGodStopper said:
I meant "all drugs." I do not think that drug prohibition prevents drug use. I think marginalizing drug users by criminalizing their behavior rather than treating it as a medical issue is not an effective method of deterring or controlling drug use.

Therefore, all drug use should be decriminalized. Furthermore, marijuana should be completely legalized, including cultivation.
Click to expand...
While I agree with you about dope, make sure it is taxed like whiskey, I wonder at what you wish to do about sales of said recreational drugs, such as LSD, DMT, ecstasy, crack, ice.

DR
 
Darth Rotor said:
While I agree with you about dope, make sure it is taxed like whiskey, I wonder at what you wish to do about sales of said recreational drugs, such as LSD, DMT, ecstasy, crack, ice.
Click to expand...

EverLastingGodStopper said:
... but the government should also move to direct hard drug users toward safe legal methods of using drugs (can such things even exist? We would need hard science to know for sure).
Click to expand...
My position is that 1) prohibition does not deter, prevent, or control drug use, 2) drug users should be directed to medical care and treatment, not jail, and 3) we need hard scientific evidence to understand how it could be possible for doctors to treat patients who choose to use drugs.

"Scientific evidence" ought to be the way that government policy is determined.
 
EverLastingGodStopper said:
My position is that 1) prohibition does not deter, prevent, or control drug use, 2) drug users should be directed to medical care and treatment, not jail, and 3) we need hard scientific evidence to understand how it could be possible for doctors to treat patients who choose to use drugs.

"Scientific evidence" ought to be the way that government policy is determined.
Click to expand...
You didn't actually answer my question, but no matter.

DR
 
EverLastingGodStopper said:
My apologies, but I am not a scientist or doctor so I am not qualified to offer a proposal backed by scientific study on how governments can best tackle the issue of "hard" drug use.
Click to expand...
No problem, we all have limits, and it is a wise man indeed who recognizes his own. All you need to do is find two more wise men and a virgin ... :cool:
 
The Wall Street Journal today reports that the Czech Republic is to join the growing list of countries decriminalising adult personal possession and use of small quantities of cannabis, and in the Czech case various other plant based drugs:

The interim Czech government, led by chief statistician-turned-Prime Minister Jan Fischer, Monday took another step towards making casual marijuana smoking a worry-free affair.

Fischer’s cabinet defined what constitutes “small amounts” of cannabis for personal use, clarifying the country’s new penal code that from next year decriminalizes cultivation and possession of the plant by individuals.

As of Jan. 1 ordinary Czechs can grow up to five marijuana plants or have several marijuana cigarettes in their pockets without fear of criminal prosecution. Previously what constituted a small amount was not specified and the police and courts loosely interpreted the penal code case by case, often resulting in incarceration of home growers.
Click to expand...

CTK reports:

Prague - The Czech government today approved the list of hallucinogenic plants and mushrooms, including hemp, coca, mescaline cactus and magic mushrooms, and decided that people would be allowed to grow up to five pieces of such plants and keep 40 magic mushrooms at home, a CTK source said.

...

If the government approves the ministry's proposal without changes in two weeks, people will be able to have four pills of ecstasy in their possession and up to five grammes of hashish.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom