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

[Do4600]

It's hard to look at something as insanely destructive as meth and think it should be legal, but at the same time, how can we draw a line? How can we say that here you have control over your body and here you don't? We can't quantify these things. The only way to do it is arbitrarily.

This is true, but some drugs are more destructive than others, obviously meth is more destructive than marijuana and doctors at the turn of the century were proscribing cocaine and morphine to patients who had colds, yet we don't hear too much ill coming of those prescriptions. I think we should categorize drugs by shear destructiveness to the human body in a typical dose and then categorize them by the strength of addiction they can create and then from there we have an idea of how dangerous each one can be and perhaps with that perspective we can determine what should actually be legal and what should be illegal.

 

[Do4600]

Which incedintally rose to prominence because heroin was more expensive and harder to get a hold of.
If addicts could get heroin in a pharmacy, then Krokodil would cease to be an issue,

Except that it wouldn't change anything for the better. The users would still be subhuman remains of people, they'd still be good for nothing and cause a lot of problems.

The only difference is it would cost buckets of money to supply people who have chosen addiction for themselves with somewhat legal drugs.

Just look at synthetic cannabis, which is a nasty drug, way worse that, say, cannabis.
It is only on the market because cannabis is illegal.
legalization would change that.

Not true. Pot is de facto legal here, and still causes lots of problems with addiction. Worse yet, legalisation has brought us drug tourists, extremely violent drug runners who chase drug tourists, and the average age of pot addicts is ridiculously low. Ussually 16-17. I've seen pot addicts as young as 13.

And the addicts I see at work are the really serious ones.

Legalisation has only made things worse.

But a wider legalization among western countries would stop that tourism, and allowing people to produce it would put gangsters out of business. The idea of people becoming addicted is also associated with legal drugs like alcohol, which also has it's share of 13 year old addicts.

 

[Joccaren]

IMO people should be allowed to do what they want with their own body. They want to ruin their lives - be my guest. They're able to do so anyway - it really isn't that hard to get a hold of drugs - and all that making Drugs illegal is doing is making it more dangerous for those who do drugs.

For one drugs are a criminal enterprise. That never ends well, gangland wars and poor production facilities can lead to problems. In addition, I highly doubt that a criminal would care if someone became addicted to drugs - whereas a legal distributor might be required to ensure that they were not before selling [Might not, but its something that could be discussed].

In addition, little to no actual research is done on drugs thanks to them being illegal. This means we may be missing out on possible medical applications, as well as not knowing the full potential side effects of drug use. To quote the former Head of the British Drug Board [Or W/E it was called]: "I can show you a thousand papers on the effects an angry face can have on the brain, but I can't show you a single paper telling you what cannabis will do".

 

[Naeras]

Its not that uncommon. Companies "cut" their products with all sorts of shit too. Look at how cigarettes are considered deadly, mostly because of all the crap companies put in it over the years.

Food companies do this too but no one wants to admit it.

If drugs were legalized, companies would do the same as the drug dealers.

Its not like people messing around with a consumable item will go away once its legal. The only difference now is that drugs would be cut with more sophisticated chemicals than embalming fluid.

The first thing is that, at least here in Norway, misleading product descriptions are illegal. Which makes sense, obviously. It's a reason why stuff sold in regular stores have to be labeled with ingredients and nutritional information. If that doesn't match up, you'll get a legal notice to either fix the product to fit the product description, or vice versa, or get a hefty fine and your product taken off the shelves. It's the reason why some fake pizza-cheese-thing wasn't allowed to call itself "cheese" anymore, for example. Which obviously impacted the sales and caused the price on the stuff to plummet.
Secondly, consumer rights associations as well as state organs actually test products before they're allowed access to the market, provided it's possible to test it (cough olive oil cough). You can't really do that as easily if the product in question isn't legally traded. Plus, publishing information about the product is a lot easier if it's a legal product. Saying that "dealer A has less bullshit mixed in his stuff than dealer B, C and D" in public channels is, for some reason, rather hard.

You have the options of having the possibility of quality control, and having no possibility of quality control. Along with all the other good reasons for legalization, of course.

 

[Nouw]

Don't do it around people that don't want to be in your presence then feel free to get as high as you want. Just be wary of the mental and physical health consequences.

 

[Naeras]

Not necessarily. Look how long it took for people to find out about "meat glue" and "pink slime."

The FDA even has a limit of how many bugs can be in a certain food. People know that there are bugs in their food, yet under "federal law", yet none of them start campaigns for more sanitary foods.

Some companies try to use formal scientific names to bypass regulation or confuse consumers.

It may not work in Europe, but it works int he US where most people want their drugs. It will be decades before people realize companies have been selling them industrialized drugs only for them to say "you mean to tell me Mr. Super Rich isn't my friend?"

Even then, people may not even care enough to change it. New drugs will slip into the same boat as cigarettes, because the US doesn't view funding the FDA or anything that isn't related to driving a tank through the third world as a "priority."

I wish I'd be capable of replying with something less childish than "well then the US is dumb", but I honestly can't really think of anything else to write right now. ._.

 

[neversleep]

technically i'm all for this.
It locks out crime, people are free to do what they want, the government can save lives of recreational drug users and less people will be in prison.

Too bad that it practice it will probably just result in an explosion of addictions and it will probably do alot of horrible things to tons of people. Alcohol alone has destroyed so many lives because we say it's okay. Imagine if your dad or mom has a severe cocaïne problem instead and shit get's alot worse.

It's true that a lot of people would just be able to hop on to some drug one night and then live life as if nothing happened. But a lot of people lack that self control and it's good that there's laws keeping them safe(r) from addiction.

 

[Seydaman]

I'm all for it, eliminates crime, gives the government tax dollars, freeedom, and all that.

Captcha: know your rights
Damn straight.

 

[Seydaman]

technically i'm all for this.
It locks out crime, people are free to do what they want, the government can save lives of recreational drug users and less people will be in prison.

Too bad that it practice it will probably just result in an explosion of addictions and it will probably do alot of horrible things to tons of people. Alcohol alone has destroyed so many lives because we say it's okay. Imagine if your dad or mom has a severe cocaïne problem instead and shit get's alot worse.

It's true that a lot of people would just be able to hop on to some drug one night and then live life as if nothing happened. But a lot of people lack that self control and it's good that there's laws keeping them safe(r) from addiction.

If you look at data where marijuana was legalized, after five years it was found there was a general overall decrease in use.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

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

Youve obviously never spoken to a teenager. You know. The prime target market for drug dealers?

Lets review what happens when we remove taboo in another case:

The netherlands - Sex is not taboo at all, it is discussed and displayed whereever people want and prostitution is llegal. Teenage pregnancy rate? Lowest in europe and america. Why? Because sex isnt this "amazing secret taboo awesome". Its just a thing. The teenagers dont care. Because it isnt "special" to get some with as many people as possible and thus cause STD's and pregnancy.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/Teenage_birth_rate_per_1000_women_15%E2%80%9319%2C_2000-09.svg

The countries with the laxer attitude to sex have lower teenage pregnancy rates... WHY?!

Well its because people talk about it. It isnt swept under the covers. It has no taboo appeal. There is one thing teenagers love to do and thats break taboo. Remove the taboo. And Tada. Instantly loses appeal. If your DAD smoked weed from time to time you wouldnt think it was cool as a teenager. It would just be a thing. A completely normal thing not worth emulating or making a big deal out of.

You also have no citation for the idea medical costs on drugs would be higher than taxation. Logically speaking the medical costs are already in place since people are doing the drugs anyway. llegalising them just changes who they are buying them from. Now the government makes money instead of the afghan drug lords who enslave villagles and use child labor. Also used to fund terrorist groups. Its only a win.

Restrictions:

ONLY in the home.

Driving under the influence is a SERIOUS offence.

Government and third party monitored production lines. No cutting. No over doses. Llegally cannot make a VERY dangerous chemical.

Minors caught with them WILL be prosecuted outside their houses.

Street dealing still illegal. Same system as alcohol - liscence needed.

Side effects tested properly and CLEARLY advertised.

Illegal to sell to someone with a pre existing mental health condition.

 

[Skratt]

Would it really be so bad to just make all drugs legal?

Yes. The world would not end of course and we wouldn't have an apocalypse or anything, but many of these drugs are not good for you in ANY way. Some of them are of zero benefit and are the chemical equivalent of rat poison. The effect experienced is that of your body dying a little bit - or completely in some cases.

Hardcore drugs that are illegal now are a huge problem to families and communities around the world. I don't see that problem getting better by legalizing them.

 

[AnarchistFish]

No, authorities keep certain things out of our reach for our own good

This is a dumb opinion to hold

 

[The Last Nomad]

Drugs are good m'kay

 

[The Funslinger]

I just want point out another benefit to making opiates legal. You make it very difficult for terrorist groups to raise money. Think what it would do for Mexico alone. Street crime drops significantly too because if junkies can get cheap clean junk they don't need to rip off houses and rob people. I don't support the legalization of amphetamines though, while junkies are mostly harmless as long as they get their junk, speed freaks are dangerous at all times.

This seems a fair compromise.

My opinion on drugs is the same as my opinion on guns. Making them illegal forces them into the black market and out of government control. By extension, that means that anyone acquiring them is most likely the wrong sort of person, by default.

 

[Bassik]

I am very okay with natural drugs being legal, but those chemical bullshit drugs people take? Fuck those.

In my life, I have been on both ritallin and anti-depressants.
I had some serious mental problems growing up, and I had to visit a lot of psychiatrists.
Now most of you envision a psychiatrist like a Frasier or a Freud, but in reality, they are those drug dealers that hang around the schools, only with an expensive office and an expensive suit.
Two sessions, he figures I am hyperactive (I am a very calm person) and boom! Ritallin! That stuff gave me seizures and made me slightly psychotic.

So another psychiatrist. He finally believes me when I tell him I am depressed, it took four expensive sessions for him to confirm that I was, in fact, telling the truth when I told him of my problems. (Dick) So, you think we talked it out? That he helped me get through some issues? Off course not, just pop a pill. Paroxetine, it was called, and that stuff was just poison. Ruined my stumach for life, again made me psychotic, gave me insomnia, made me fat (I lost all excess weight when I stopped popping those things) and the addiction was akin to an addiction to cocaine, no joke.
One day, I just locked myself away for a week just so I could beat the addiction to those LEGAL drugs. Worst week of my life, let me tell you that.

Fuck drugs.
But not weed. Weed is fine, weed made me deal with my issues, face myself and I came out on top.

It's a miracle cure for the mind, really.