Drugs you think should be legalized?

[chaos order]

I think that drugs should remain illegal. i personally dont have a problem with pot smokers but, its the constant bullshit they spout when they try to justify them smoking it. pot is at least as dangerous as smoking tobacco, so why legalize it. I know there will be ppl saying well if pot is as dangerous and tobacco, and tobacco is legal then why shouldn't weed be then. MY argument to that would be that yes tobacco is a health hazard but it doesn't justify making another drug legal if its similar in toxicity. Now im all for medicinal marijuana i mean i understand and accept the fact that it has some medicinal properties, but im not for total legalization of it so that everyone can use it.

 

[Lordmarkus]

None. Even the "lighter" drugs can make you motivated to try the heavier stuff and then you're hooked, no turning back.

Our society have enough problem with smokers and drinkers already. Our government (Sweden) uses taxmoney to give junkies clean needles, I mean what the fuck...

Yes I know that it is to make them stop spreading HIV and other diseases but if you're so down in your shit than it's better you just drop down and die.

Yeah, the same old "slippery slope" argument.

There is NO proof that lighter drugs somehow force you to try "the heavier stuff" and there will never be one.

Saying that, say, pot, makes you try crack is pretty much like saying that drinking milk motivates you to drink beer.

Reading Chuck Palanhiuk's "Fight Club" might "motivate" me to start an anarchic cult and commit various acts of terrorism - but for that, I'd need a conscious decision which I would be responsible for. And I think knowledge of things should definitely be available no matter how damaging these things might be.

What you're suggesting with drugs is a lot like abstinence crap that I hear happens a lot in USA. The idea that if you don't teach people about something, they won't do it. Especially something so ingrained in society and "humanity" as we see it - and various drugs, mostly alcohol, had important place in most societies for the past, oh I don't know, couple of thousand years.

And it's a really interesting idea you have there, that people who are practically incurable at this time should be just killed off. Not that I'm that against it, but the majority of people probably is and for a reason.

Our pleassure neurotoxins have had great time this last thousands of years it has been known, making slaves work harder without food and make amputations almost painless.

Though I can't see how the fuck you see it relevant too compare milk/beer with pot/crack. Milk are a harmless substance (if you're not allergic to say) and are essential to strengthen the bones when beer includes ethanol which is a neurotoxin.

Pot and crack are BOTH drugs, essentialy two sides of a bad coin. It would've made sense if you had said "drink beer, try vodka", that's an valid and relevant comparison. Nice arguments otherwise but better luck next time.

 

[tzimize]

Ah. Finally found some reliable (?) sources to my claims that nicotine is almost as bad as heroin.

http://www1.umn.edu/perio/tobacco/nicaddct.html

http://www.nytimes.com/1987/03/29/magazine/nicotine-harder-to-kickthan-heroin.html?pagewanted=1

I havent read it all, just found it a bit interesting.

 

[Shpongled]

Anyone who suggest LSD - You do realise it's very closely related to crystal meth, right? It's not that addictive or physically destructive, but it can boil you alive and do incredible amounts of psychological damage very quickly.

There's a whole lot of misinformation in this thread. LSD has absolutely no relation to methamphetamine whatsoever, apart from that they agonize the same receptors. LSD has no permanent effect on the body whatsoever, even in huge amounts. Theres people who have accidentally taken doses of up to 300* the normal amount, and 8 months down the line are physically perfectly fit. It *can* have permanent effects on the mind, however HPPD and "flashbacks" are very uncommon in normal doses.

In terms of bodily harm, most psychedelics (ie mescaline, psilocybin, salvia, DMT, LSD) are just as safe as cannabis (and far less toxic than alcohol, it must be said.) Though there can be dangers in mistakenly eating the wrong kind of shroom. With decriminalization however this would never be an issue.

In terms of addiction, no psychedelic contains physically addictive chemicals and mental addictions are extremely uncommon. Trips can be very draining on both the mind and body, most people simply won't want to be tripping more than once a fortnight or so at least.

A mention for none-recreational uses of marijuana has to be made as well. Hemp is an extremely useful fibre. Decriminalization would allow more widespread production of this wonderful plant.

Anyone who criticizes drug use on the basis that its "pathetic", that people shouldn't need to "rely" on the drugs to have fun, i say this: Extreme sports. Compared to climbing a cliff face, LSD is harmless.

And yes, i registered just to make this post. People need to stop spreading this misinformation.

 

[Tharwen]

Drug usage

Drug abuse

 

[GreatVladmir]

Weed.
Legalize it.

Also, legalizing heroine and cocaine is a
FUCKING STUPID IDEA WHY WOULD YOU THINK THAT IS A GOOD IDEA CUZ IT'S NOT!!!

Well, I'd like cocaine leaglised simply because I like to drink Courvoisier and snort 2g on my weekends and if it was legal, I would not have to deal with those pesky Police officers when I go to the young rapscalian to purchase said concaine, now excuse me while me and my chums spit-roast a young actress looking for a part in a play fnarr fnarr! /sarcasm

Seriously, legalising (not legalizing) is the best step forward to a free democracy, the goverment, can control the ammounts purchased from goverment approved drug stores, staffed by dealers because who has a better knowledge than a dealer? They can tax it, so they can make good money of it and best of all, it would be fuckin hilarious to see a cop sniff a fat line before going to bust someone, I'd film n youtubed that shit.

 

[Lex15]

I'm in for legalizing of:
Cannabis
Salvia Divinorum
And perhaps DMT too.

The cannabis one is obvious.
Salvia is about just as safe as cannabis and gives you a psychedelic experience instead of making you high.
And DMT. Found in some plants here and there. Psychedelic experience too. Not as rough as LSD, is not addictive and is not harmful, as far as I know.
Oh and all of those above, is smoked.

-Lex

 

[Benny Blanco]

In the interests of full disclosure, I have smoked pot on a semi-regular basis for about 10 years, as well as moderate alcohol use and tobacco (in the form of delicious shisha) and have tried other (now-illegal) drugs, although none which I will be consuming again...

I would like to echo the view constantly reiterated by The Economist that all drugs should be legal, taxed and regulated. Not just the ones I like.

People continue to take illegal drugs in the face of health risks, draconian penalties and black market prices. This is a fact. Also, bear in mind that by virtue of it's porous border with Afghanistan, the Islamic Republic of Iran (where possession of more than 5 grams gets you the death penalty) is the world's highest per-capita opiate consumer, with a massive emerging crystal meth problem amongst the North Tehran upper-middle-class.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ir.html

Clearly strict prohibition is no barrier to drug problems emerging in a country.

People smoke less weed on average in places where it is decriminalised - Holland and Spain have lower usage rates than the UK or France.

The premium entailed in black-market pricing benefits only the organised criminals who deal in illegal drugs. All the externalities of the drug market are already placed at the door of hospitals, Law Enforcement agencies and society at large.

A sensible system of legalisation and regulation of substances for adult use would allow tax revenue to correct these market failiures and mean that only adults could buy them. Whether this follows the Dutch coffeeshop model (licensing and enforcement provided by the govt. but individual businesses allowed to operate) or the Scandinavian liquor-store model (govt. directly runs all stores and strictly controls sale) is a matter for your own political choice.

For too long, being tough on drugs has been easy political capital for politicians: in the UK there was a recent decision to reclassify cannabis to a class B drug (it had temporarily been downclassed to a C) was implemented in direct contravention to the advice of the government's own drug advisers because it was felt that the law-and-order mandate was politically important in the pending election.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8336635.stm

For similar reasons, an idea to buy opium at source in Afghanistan (which produces 90+% of the world's opium) to meet the shortfall of opiate-based painkillers on the NHS was dismissed out of hand. In countries such as Afghanistan and Colombia the drug habits of the Western World are a major force in destabilisation, with enormous amounts of (mostly US) money and aid being funnelled into the eradication of what is, for most farmers in those countries, the most lucrative cash-crop. Meanwhile, warlords and paramilitary groups (such as the
Taliban in Afghanistan and FARC in Colombia) get rich, corruption is endemic (President Karzai of Afghanistan is estimated to be a vast beneficiary of the opium trade) and the rule of law is undermined.

As the OP stated, regulation is impossible in a black market. A high amount of drug harm comes from impurities, infection, unreliable purity (which can lead to overdoses) and mixing drugs, all of which could be avoided or mitigated by legalisation, regulation and education.

Quite apart from which, if I'm old enough to drink, smoke, gamble and die for my country, where does any government get the right to lock me up for my own protection? I don't feel that smoking the odd spliff is more harmful than being put in prison and if given the opportunity to do so legally (as in Spain, the Netherlands etc.) I would happily grow my own, depriving criminal gangs of revenue and getting a better product for much less money (I remember reading that both yield and quality improve when you grow in a greenhouse as opposed to a commercial hydroponic operation). Obviously non-social supply would need to be controlled but I would happily tend my legally-allowed number of plants without any exposure to some wannabe gangsta who thinks he's Don Corleone just because he's selling me an 8th.

 

[Sjakie]

I hope they would still use LSD as a therapy drug but not really legalize it for recreational use.
I think LSD has the potential to really change you, combine a session of 6-10 hours on LSD with a Therapist and i think any disorders you had would be gone.

Right, because going on a "trip" and seeing Pink Unicorns is the perfect solution to peoples problems, They'd just get addicted.

In my opinion, Marijuana is the ONLY drug (so far) that i can see being legalized with any chance because it's not as dangerous as people make it out to be.

Ow yeah, having a healthcare professinal in the room and a few sessions on a regulated dose of LSD really makes you addicted in 1 go, LSD isn't even addictive man. Check the wiki [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lsd] :s Since LSD warps your thoughtproces and is regarded as an introspective drug. It is an ideal drug to have patients question their own problematic behavior and it gave a window for therapists to instill better (or at least not self-destructive) behavior in the patients that were under it's influence.
As for Hallucinations, those only occur in really high dossages and usually when people use it in the wrong location with the wrong people around them eg: a bad "trip"
Therefore i do not approve of it being an over the counter drug, but something that only doctors can use. Kinda the same idea as with morphine (which is REALLY addictive btw, since it stems from heroin)

Introduced by Sandoz Laboratories, with trade-name Delysid, as a drug with various psychiatric uses in 1947, LSD quickly became a therapeutic agent that appeared to show great promise. However, the emerging recreational use of the drug by youth culture in the Western world during the 1960s led to a political firestorm that resulted in its prohibition.[7] A number of organizations?including the Beckley Foundation, MAPS, Heffter Research Institute and the Albert Hofmann Foundation?exist to fund, encourage and coordinate research into its medicinal uses.[8]

Know your drugs before you use/judge them!

 

[Crimson_Dragoon]

My view has been that people (at least adults) should have the right to put whatever they want into their bodies. If that means they use something dangerous, than that is their responsibility and they should be allowed to take the consequences of that. Now, there should be laws protected other people from drug users (like how drinking and driving is illegal).

I do admit that this view isn't entirely reasonable or possible. However, I still don't think we have a right to say and control what people do with their own bodies.

 

[Reboare]

Marijuana should be legalized in my opinion. It's less harmful than alcohol or tobacco. As for the Gateway drug theory, it hasn't been proven at all and there are studies and arguments that are for and against it.

 

[TheTim]

keep everything except marujuana illegal

 

[Necromancer1991]

Pot definitely, I mean its like cigarettes, only you don't NEED to smoke it and you have a much lower chance of getting cancer (but then again, what doesn't cause cancer nowadays?)

Nothing else I can think of legalizing, you have salvia which is perfectly legal, eating anything poppy related is technically (watch mythbusters) the same as smoking Opium, Crack is way too strong to legalize, definitely not heroine, and crystal meth is just plain toxic for god's sake (it's like everything under your kitchen sink and most of the chemicals in your car, only
super-concentrated)!

 

[DividedUnity]

Weed is the only drug I would ever want to see legalised. Heroine and all the rest should be detrosyed on sight and dealers given a life sentence. They are horrible drugs that will screw you up alot worse than pot ever will

 

[Weaver]

At least you're pretty reasonable about it OP.
Some of the stoners I used to know wanted weed legalized, but failed to realize that with legalization comes taxation, control and moderation.

They just imagined walking into a store, smoking a few bowls then driving down the street to McDonalds all perfectly legal. When in reality, they would probably invent a way to detect if you're high while driving (like a breathalyzer type thing).

Though, legalization can be a scary thing. Anyone who has been to Amsterdam can attest to how fucked up things have gotten. Sure visiting and getting high seems great, but Amsterdam is rotting from the inside. Everything closes at night, including train stations, because they just become a haven for junkies to sleep in and dose up in. Employment rates are really low because of the drug problems and there are beggars everywhere just wanting enough for their next fix. You don't want to be out at night there.

 

[Necromancer1991]

AC10, I agree for the most part, but:
1.the people who smoke weed until their heads fall off would do so any way, you would just have more people doing it. (which would happen anyway I might add)

2.driving any type of vehicle after doing any kind of drug is generally frowned upon as it is.

3.people get high on perfectly legal chemicals, (I.E. Paint, Markers, and so on) so generally people will go great lengths to get high (like cheesing).

[If you don't get that last cheesing bit watch some more south park]