Poll: Poll: How would you feel about the legalisation of ALL drugs (with some restrictions)?

[Chanel Tompkins]

While I can see some use to it, other drugs that are currently illegal should stay illegal. Particularly ones that usually get used on other people for various horrible reasons, like roofies.

 

[NinjaDeathSlap]

As i see it, there is one massive problem with the legalisation of hard drugs, atleast in Denmark where we have a Tax funded social velfare system, that pays for all healthcare, AND support those unable to work.

So while i belive people should be alowed to fuck themself up on chemicals if thats what they want, i dont wanna have to pay for it! I dont wanna give them a portion of our tax income every month cuz they are unable to hold a job, nor do i want to pay for all the health problems that can arise as a result.

Yeah, in the UK we have tax funded healthcare as well (which is under a lot of strain as it is), which was one of the reasons coming to this conclusion was not easy. Can we really say that they are only hurting themselves when we're paying to save their lives every time they OD? However, this is only an issue if the numbers of people actually on hard drugs dramatically increases after legalisation, which for reasons I explained in the OP I don't believe to be the case any more. Thing is, because use of hard drugs is pushed underground at the moment, it's impossible to quantify just how many people are taking them, so we don't have any figures with which to compare if they became legal, meaning we'll never know for sure if the numbers went up, down, or stayed relatively unchanged.

All I know is, I've taken drugs before, and I know a lot of other people who have too, and a very common theme we share when we talk about our experiences, is that the first time is an act of defiance. We took it as a way of sticking two fingers up to everyone who had ever tried to tell us what to do, or played the morality card on us (I am aware of how immature this is now, but it was a long time ago). Illegality was a big part of the allure. While I'm not saying for sure that I wouldn't have ended up taking them anyway for other reasons if that hadn't been the case, there certainly would have been far less motivation if the drugs in question were accepted and mundane.

 

[Rastien]

Hard drugs such as herion and PCP based drugs, i'm not to sure how to proceede on really, whilst they are illegal currently people still use them. I would keep these illegal but then we get into the state with what is legal and why isn't this legal.

Theres no real reason to keep them illegal. I mean, yes, if it's illegality somehow stopped people from taking heroin, I'd be behind it, but it doesn't. People take them anyway.

And, just like with MDMA, a good portion of the deaths related to hard drugs like cocaine and heroin (a good portion, not all of them) happen because the drug has been cut with something like washing powder or whatever.

I'm not saying you should make heroin legal to the point where you can buy it over the counter at Walmart, but at least decriminalizing it would be a good idea. Also, more help for addicts - and by help I mean giving them the drug for free if theres no other way. Yes, I am completely serious. It would at least stop junkies from breaking into houses to finance their addiction.

Oh no im sure your serious im pro drugs anyways, but i guess the concept of making herion readily avaible and the weakness of people is what concerns me.

With that said... im all for dawrinism and if someone wants to cook themselves into mush on herion there gonna find someway to do it.

I think the key part is make all drugs readily avaible but actually educate people as to what they exactly do.

E.g. explain all the side effects not just the negatives and let people weigh up wether the cost out weighs the gain.

 

[Richardplex]

Majority of drugs, yeah, legalise them, easier to regulate etc. Some drugs I draw the line at though, though only a very few. For an example, Crocodile. Don't google it unless you have some serious stomach - people's bones are exposed from that.

 

[Shpongled]

I'm going to say no, just on the basis that people already can't handle their damn highs with things like alcohol, give them something even harder to control like coke or the various other hard drugs you might just have a bigger problem on your hands.
You cite money going in from the government control, but you fail to realize the time/money it would take to actually enforce control, it's one thing to deal with someone who is drunk and stumbling around then it is dealing with someone who is amped up on Ecstasy or cocaine. And the whole getting the info out there about each drug costs resources.
Even then how do you deal out drugs? Someone walks into a bar and orders some weed or heroin, how do you measure when someone has had enough it's hard enough with alcohol and now toss in people mixing stuff, how do you establish legal limits, etc.
It's one thing to say ok maybe we can handle legalizing something like weed, but to green light everything would be a nightmare.

Money is already going into enforcing it, it goes to the law officials that try to stop it. Being able to tax drugs however would actually bring in money -or at least considerably lower the current expense-(you'd have a lower level of law enforcement expense simply because you'd be able to out-price illegal drug dealers, simple rule of capitalism, you'd be able to offer a better, cheaper service)

And what do you think is better? Having people do drugs in a controlled environment where you can limit the damage they might do?

Or have them doing worse impure versions of the same drugs without any control, regulation or knowledge?

Right now the enforcement is "hey you're on something you're going to jail, and if we find some of the stuff on you, you're going to jail for a longer time."
You're going to have to spend money training officers to not only recognize the various highs people are on, like I said test will have to be created to check people on the field. That is going to cost a good chunk of change, you can't just drag everyone in for a blood test. And even then what do you do for a case where someone blows under the limit for alcohol and then does whatever test and they're under the limit for say marijuana, but the combination clearly has them severely intoxicated. The enforcement now wouldn't be enough/suitable for the new situation.

And what kind of controlled environment do you propose for a wide variety of drugs? I sure as shit would not want to be the owner of a bar who has a bunch of people hopped up on coke or a bunch of people freaking the fuck out on acid. Even then at least with some of the "lighter" drugs like alcohol or pot you can have a bit and still function and people can be on their merry way. But I don't think there is such a thing as a small hit of the harder drugs, what kind of facility can you provide for people who choose the harder drugs? Or do you trust them to do it in their homes and not be a menace?

Even then who says that any decent place will even take up the harder drugs, a normal bar might take up weed, but they probably won't tough the rest with a 10 foot pole. And this will probably mean that the places that take it up will be pretty scummy places that are more than happy to take the cash, distribute, and let the people out on the street.

Merely being on a drug isn't really technically illegal, and 90% of the time the police won't give a shit if you look like you're on something. The only times they tend to intervene is when they A) think they can find something in your possession or B) you're clearly a behaving in a dangerous manner. Neither of these applies to the vast majority of people on drugs on a typical Saturday night. I don't really see why you'd need particularly specialized drug tests that we don't already have, the question for police officers right now is "Does he look like he could be a danger to himself or others in his current state", there's no reason that would change. If someones acting dangerously, they get taken in, if not, they don't get bothered, same as it's always been.

The "controlled environments" would generally be peoples homes, no need for specialized bars or anything like that. There's already tons of drug use going on, there's probably a hard drug user within a couple of doors from you, you just don't notice it because most drug users aren't raving lunatics or criminals, despite popular opinion. For those people their hobby becomes safer, for the criminals their drug use becomes well-known, enabling health services or LE to have a greater impact on them.

Easiest way i can think of doing it: lighter stuff like weed, mushrooms or LSD, sell from headshops, heavier stuff with actual addiction potential or health risks, sell from pharmacies. If someone chooses to buy heroin/crack/amphetamines, their purchase is recorded and their name/address goes in a file somewhere, they get 90%+ pure, cheap product, sold in pre-weighed dosages with plenty of usage directions, and for those who use them, clean sterilised needles. This way you minimise chances of the user harming themselves, and you maximise their exposure to those who need to know, ie LE and health services.

On top of this, educate your youths (and adults, to be honest, but we can safely assume drugs will never be legalized while most adults today are still alive, we've been fed too much propaganda at this point to change our minds) on the actual REAL, SCIENTIFIC effects and dangers of drugs, drop the propaganda bullshit, remove the mystique behind them that attracts a lot of people in the first place, get them out of the underground and i doubt you'll see a particular sharp or lasting rise in drug use.

Really, the main problems with drugs is that few people actually know anything about them, and this goes for users and kids-on-internet-forums alike. It's evident everytime a drug thread pops up on these forums that most people here don't know the first thing about them and i've seen far too many users do stupid shit to have any faith that they're keeping safe either. It is VERY possible to use drug's safely, but when 90% of the information out there on them is bullshit propaganda it's no surprise people are harming themselves when they do take the plunge.

"But I don't think there is such a thing as a small hit of the harder drugs"? I mean come on, which page of the DARE handbook was this taken from? It's a tiny and banal point i know, but of COURSE there is a small hit of a hard drug, it's a fucking drug. Take a low dose and you won't feel much, same with any other chemical a human consumes in a lifetime, whether it's recreational or not. It's basic fucking chemistry.

 

[BOOM headshot65]

Hell no. You might (MIGHT!!) be able to convince me on weed, but try and tell me you want to legalize something like METH.....*whistles to nearby cops*

And just to adress your little list:

- Prison overcrowding vanishes.

Ok, I have to admit, that would happen.

- Organised crime as we know it plummets.

Um, no. They will just find a new source of income. Heck, I wouldnt be suprised if they found a way to make money while it IS legal.

- Crime as a means to fund drug habits drops dramatically.

Depends on what price you make it, because alot of the people who use it at the moment STILL wouldnt be able to afford it.

- Boost to the economy due to drug sales and taxation.

Which is then lost from increased medical bills and more problems with various drugs users doing things like crashing while high, police having to enforce standards similar to alcohol. Its not worth it IMO.

- Drugs made safer. No longer cut with poisonous substances. Users properly tracked by the system, therefore help (if needed) available earlier. Drop in spread of diseases from needle sharing.

You can only make a drug so safe. Alot will still be very dangerous and well worth the "illegal" mark even in their most watered down form. (meth and PCP come to mind)

- Possible drop in drug use from lack of taboo nature, clearer and more wide reaching health warnings, as well as proper regulation.

Funny, most people will avoid something if it has a taboo.

 

[Hazy992]

Hell no. You might (MIGHT!!) be able to convince me on weed, but try and tell me you want to legalize something like METH.....*whistles to nearby cops*

Can I least convince you on ecstasy too? It's less dangerous than alcohol. At the very least it shouldn't be class A.

- Prison overcrowding vanishes.

Ok, I have to admit, that would happen.

Good we're in agreement on that one.

- Organised crime as we know it plummets.

Um, no. They will just find a new source of income. Heck, I wouldnt be suprised if they found a way to make money while it IS legal.

Of course they would, gangs will always find ways to make money, but one of the most violent and dangerous ways they go about it would plummet. Surely that's still a bonus? It's no coincidence that homicides went up drastically during prohibition and back down again when alcohol was legalised.

And did you know that around 90% of the world's opium comes from Afghanistan and that it accounts for around 1/3 of the country's economy? You know where that money goes? Local warlords and insurgents. Now if production of opium was legalised in Afghanistan, it could be government regulated, which not only would put a significant dent in the funding of groups like the Taliban, but imagine what the Afghan government could do with that extra revenue.

- Crime as a means to fund drug habits drops dramatically.

Depends on what price you make it, because alot of the people who use it at the moment STILL wouldnt be able to afford it.

Of course you're right there, but the reason drugs are so expensive is because they're illegal. It costs a hell of a lot of money to make drugs and smuggle them without being caught.

- Boost to the economy due to drug sales and taxation.

Which is then lost from increased medical bills and more problems with various drugs users

The revenues from cigarettes more than make up for the money we spend on cigarette related illnesses. Same principle would probably apply here but on a smaller scale.

Not to mention that we're still paying for all this anyway but not gaining any revenue.

doing things like crashing while high,

Yes and everyone who drinks alcohol obviously drinks and drives(!)

police having to enforce standards similar to alcohol. Its not worth it IMO.

I don't get what you mean. You mean doing drug tests if they think they're under the influence? What's wrong with that?

- Drugs made safer. No longer cut with poisonous substances. Users properly tracked by the system, therefore help (if needed) available earlier. Drop in spread of diseases from needle sharing.

You can only make a drug so safe. Alot will still be very dangerous and well worth the "illegal" mark even in their most watered down form. (meth and PCP come to mind)

OK I'll concede that, but again the same could be said for legal drugs. Why make them more dangerous than they need to be? People will take them regardless so you may as well make them as safe as possible.

- Possible drop in drug use from lack of taboo nature, clearer and more wide reaching health warnings, as well as proper regulation.

Funny, most people will avoid something if it has a taboo.

They would still be taboo even if they were legal. Alcoholics aren't exactly held in high regard.

 

[Aurora Firestorm]

Legalize them and tax the hell out of them. You can push money quite far without having people turn to black markets. The problem is that at that point, you'd still have the poor junkies who can't make enough money to fund their habit, still steal/kill/whatever to get what they need. I guess it would cut down the distraction on our police forces, since they will be chasing the people doing seriously bad things in the name of drugs, and not just the adult adolescent hanging out on his couch drinking beer and growing weed in the back yard.

Richardplex: Oh hell, Crocodile. (Or Krokodil, as the Russians call it.) That stuff is horrible. It also exists entirely because the users can't get their hands on other drugs they're looking for at the prices they can pay, so they're basically brewing up a super-toxic concoction of paint thinner, gasoline, iodine, hydrochloric acid, red phosphorous, and codeine. It's a substitute for heroin, because heroin is so expensive. You only get to this point if you've totally lost your mind on drugs.

But yeah, don't look at pictures. They're pretty vomit-inducing.

 

[spartan231490]

There should always be exceptions. Cocaine and heroine come to mind. Did you know, that the amount of cocaine it takes to kill you decreases with prolonged use. Prolonged use, even of the exact same dose, will eventually kill you. If it doesn't, it causes symptoms that often result in a mis-diagnosis of manic depression.

Heroin is even worse, I'm sure I don't need to tell any of you that.

I am all for the legalization of pretty much all drugs, but some of them are so bad for you that there is no legitimate reason anyone has to use them.

Well, people obviosly use them. Otherwise there wouldn't be such a large market for them. Cocaine and heroin are very dangerous, true, but since you can't stop people from using you might as well legalize, regulate and sell them. Not only would you make them safer by setting certain standards and making it illegal to cut them but you could also, in the long run, implement certain restrictions that would serve to limit the negative effects of said drugs.

Horrible reasoning. People commit murder too, that doesn't mean we should legalize it. Maybe you can make them safer, but you can't make them safe, they will always be too dangerous to have any legitimate use. Also, cutting doesn't make a drug more dangerous, unless you cut it with something like rat poison.

Further, how on earth would you "limit the negative effects", the drug itself is deadly poison, you can't get around that.

Lastly, these drugs are horrifically addictive. They make alcohol and nicotine and just about everything else look about as addictive as sugar. They make people into junkies, and that isn't good for anyone, and makes it far too easy for whoever controls the supply to control users.

 

[NinjaDeathSlap]

- Possible drop in drug use from lack of taboo nature, clearer and more wide reaching health warnings, as well as proper regulation.

Funny, most people will avoid something if it has a taboo.

You ever hear the saying "rules are made to be broken"? This is particularly true where younger people are concerned, and, unsurprisingly, the vast majority of drug users are young adults. You think that for a second these people give a single shit for the moral arbiters of society who will go out of their way to tell everyone who will listen that 'drugs are bad, m'kay?'. Like fuck they do. It's that rebellious attitude that gives hard drugs their 'glamour', if you can call it that. Half the reason to get started is because the idea of breaking taboo's is exciting for them. It feels like an act of spite against parents, teachers, the police, the government, and that old guy who always complains about you having your music to loud.

Legalise drugs, and give it enough time for people to get used to the idea, and I guarantee nowhere near as many of these people would choose to start because nobody will care, therefore it's not exciting.

 

[RedDeadFred]

No because it will lead to the zombie apocalypse. You've seen the shit going on in Florida right? Now imagine that everywhere and more common.

Please tell me you're joking. These 'zombie attacks' are because of bath salts. Are you gonna outlaw those too?

Ah, didn't realize that's what they are. I really haven't read much about this. Just heard from friends that there's some new thing in Florida that people are taking which makes them go crazy.

But yes: BAN ALL THE BATH SALTS! /sarcasm.

Still on a more serious note, this really would lead to millions of deaths of not only the consumers but their accidental victims as well.

 

[Phlakes]

Right, let's make it easy for everyone in the country to get coked up or OD on heroin. The logic is flawless.

See, the problem with almost all these arguments is that there's no perspective. It's at the very least just as likely that legalizing drugs would go to shit as it is that it would have benefits. And since we've all lived in a world where drugs are illegal, naturally some people think that changing that would be better (you know, the grass is always greener and all that).

But the problem is that drugs are fucking dangerous. And you don't take chances with things that could very, very easily kill people. That's why cops don't screw around with armed people, because if you don't make absolutely sure that they're down and out as quickly as possible, someone could die.

And yes, there's a possibility that if all drugs were legalized, there wouldn't be a significant increase in deaths, but making it easier for people to get high on shit probably isn't worth the risk.

 

[Hazy992]

No because it will lead to the zombie apocalypse. You've seen the shit going on in Florida right? Now imagine that everywhere and more common.

Please tell me you're joking. These 'zombie attacks' are because of bath salts. Are you gonna outlaw those too?

Ah, didn't realize that's what they are. I really haven't read much about this. Just heard from friends that there's some new thing in Florida that people are taking which makes them go crazy.

But yes: BAN ALL THE BATH SALTS! /sarcasm.

Still on a more serious note, this really would lead to millions of deaths of not only the consumers but their accidental victims as well.

Fair enough. Yeah it's good old fashioned bath salts that are apparently sending people like this. Probably not a good idea to take those, they're not designed for recreational use Disregard that I'm an idiot. I didn't realise 'bath salts' was a slang term. HERPA DERP stupid Hazy!

 

[Loonyyy]

Majority of drugs, yeah, legalise them, easier to regulate etc. Some drugs I draw the line at though, though only a very few. For an example, Crocodile. Don't google it unless you have some serious stomach - people's bones are exposed from that.

Yeah, that's messed up. Weren't the people taking that (Crazy Russians) doing it out of a desire to replicate a heroin high? But with more flesh melting and gangrene? (I'm too scared to google it again)

 

[Richardplex]

Majority of drugs, yeah, legalise them, easier to regulate etc. Some drugs I draw the line at though, though only a very few. For an example, Crocodile. Don't google it unless you have some serious stomach - people's bones are exposed from that.

Yeah, that's messed up. Weren't the people taking that (Crazy Russians) doing it out of a desire to replicate a heroin high? But with more flesh melting and gangrene? (I'm too scared to google it again)

Basically yeah. Russian drug takers took it as it was really cheap and got them high, but with the side effect of making their flesh rot off the bone.

 

[JochemHippie]

Legalize softdrugs and better treatment for addicts.

That should solve most problems.

 

[Loonyyy]

Right, let's make it easy for everyone in the country to get coked up or OD on heroin. The logic is flawless.

Replace heroin with Alcohol. That's legal, so yeah, the logic IS flawless. You can overdose on alcohol (Sure, it's not as easy, but, as suggested by many, regulation helps the OD problem). Everyone over the drinking age can get wasted. They don't. It's an insane slippery slope to suggest that people will all misuse the drug. They don't misuse Alcohol to the greatest extent, and we've got strict rules in place for how to use it.

See, the problem with almost all these arguments is that there's no perspective.

Drugs fund terrorism and organised crime. Prohibition has never been successful. The War on Drugs is a massive drain on resources. It's you who lack perspective.

It's at the very least just as likely that legalizing drugs would go to shit as it is that it would have benefits.

No, it isn't. There are DEFINITE benefits and there's reason to believe the fears are unfounded.

And since we've all lived in a world where drugs are illegal, naturally some people think that changing that would be better (you know, the grass is always greener and all that).

And now you've Strawmaned everyone. They've presented logical arguments, and you've accused them of being contrarian.

But the problem is that drugs are fucking dangerous.

So is alcohol, guns, tobacco, cars, saws, and steak knives. The most dangerous activity most of us partake in is probably driving. We're not banning that. Danger isn't the reason to ban something. Especially in the case of drugs, where the danger is to the user. We deserve the freedom to choose what we do to ourselves, right?

Let's put the death penalty on suicide! Hurting yourself is dangerous! If you would do something that could harm yourself, like do drugs, cut yourself, or go roller blading without wristguards, you should be treated like a criminal! It's insane we punish people for doing things to THEMSELVES.

And you don't take chances with things that could very, very easily kill people.

We do. All the time. Like I said: Cars.

That's why cops don't screw around with armed people, because if you don't make absolutely sure that they're down and out as quickly as possible, someone could die.

Pointless analogy: Cops don't mess around with armed people, because they could shoot someone, who presumably does not wish to be shot.
Drugs serve to harm the end user, who chooses to use it. Arresting people who use them and treating them like criminals is insane.
They're completely different.

And yes, there's a possibility that if all drugs were legalized, there wouldn't be a significant increase in deaths, but making it easier for people to get high on shit probably isn't worth the risk.

1.) Enabling safe, legal access to drugs of limited dosage, and of limited potency, without toxic cutting agents would likely reduce the chance of users overdosing.
2.) Arguing that everything is probably best left alone isn't a case, and when people present good reasons against it, calling them contrarian, saying "It's super dangerous you guys" and then saying that we should simply leave well enough alone, won't convince anyone of anything.

 

[Clearing the Eye]

If someone wants to do drugs, they'll do them--and indeed they do, a lot. Making something illegal doesn't change that. No one doesn't go out and murder fifty people because it's against the law, for example. May as well tax druggies.

 

[doggy go 7]

I have been genuinely thinking this for a long time now, not because I think people should be allowed to do whatever they want, but because it would be a lot easier to get people off them if we knew who they were, as well as all the other benefits you've already pointed out.