Legalize Drugs, Why?

[JBeukema]

My point is some drugs are more addictive than others, alot of people have smoked marijuana one time and than never had the urge to do it again. Drugs like heroin and crystal meth are very addictive and take over the lives of the people addicted to them.

And making them illegal magically made it all go away?

Or it simply added the problems of drug cartels and territory wars?

I'm not saying the way things are right now is the right thing but, making drugs legal will take away power from the drug dealers and cartels but still does nothing to curb the problem of addicts unless more treatment programs are put into place also.

makes sense, then, that everyone here has voiced support for combining decriminalization with treatment

did we not mention Portugal?

 

[High_Gravity]

And making them illegal magically made it all go away?

Or it simply added the problems of drug cartels and territory wars?

I'm not saying the way things are right now is the right thing but, making drugs legal will take away power from the drug dealers and cartels but still does nothing to curb the problem of addicts unless more treatment programs are put into place also.

makes sense, then, that everyone here has voiced support for combining decriminalization with treatment

did we not mention Portugal?

I'm not sure whats going on with Portugal, did they actually legalize everything there?

 

[JBeukema]

But, as soon as you inject heroin its pretty much too late to try and stop the high right? I mean using heroin is not like sitting there and drinking beer after beer, you can always stop drinking after a certain amount but once you inject that needle how can you go back?

not everyone can do that, we call ourselves alcoholics.

addicts aren't any different than alcoholics in that there is something inside of them that drives the need to change how they feel. it isn't the drug that causes the addiction; it's the person using it, imo. there are probably people that could use heroin *socially*.

personally, i think it's foolish to allow one recreational drug (alcohol) to be legal and all the others are illegal when alcohol far and away causes more damage and misery to society.

I agree that alcohol is more dangerous to society. However, I would argue that is simply because of access as it is legal. This is the point that I think many of us are making..

we tried doing things your way, retard
Prohibition — History.com Articles, Video, Pictures and Facts

 

[JBeukema]

I'm not saying the way things are right now is the right thing but, making drugs legal will take away power from the drug dealers and cartels but still does nothing to curb the problem of addicts unless more treatment programs are put into place also.

makes sense, then, that everyone here has voiced support for combining decriminalization with treatment

did we not mention Portugal?

I'm not sure whats going on with Portugal, did they actually legalize everything there?

Pop quiz: Which European country has the most liberal drug laws? (Hint: It's not the Netherlands.)
Although its capital is notorious among stoners and college kids for marijuana haze–filled "coffee shops," Holland has never actually legalized cannabis — the Dutch simply don't enforce their laws against the shops. The correct answer is Portugal, which in 2001 became the first European country to officially abolish all criminal penalties for personal possession of drugs, including marijuana, cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine.
At the recommendation of a national commission charged with addressing Portugal's drug problem, jail time was replaced with the offer of therapy. The argument was that the fear of prison drives addicts underground and that incarceration is more expensive than treatment — so why not give drug addicts health services instead? Under Portugal's new regime, people found guilty of possessing small amounts of drugs are sent to a panel consisting of a psychologist, social worker and legal adviser for appropriate treatment (which may be refused without criminal punishment), instead of jail.
The question is, does the new policy work? At the time, critics in the poor, socially conservative and largely Catholic nation said decriminalizing drug possession would open the country to "drug tourists" and exacerbate Portugal's drug problem; the country had some of the highest levels of hard-drug use in Europe. But the recently released results of a report commissioned by the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, suggest otherwise.
The paper, published by Cato in April, found that in the five years after personal possession was decriminalized, illegal drug use among teens in Portugal declined and rates of new HIV infections caused by sharing of dirty needles dropped, while the number of people seeking treatment for drug addiction more than doubled.
"Judging by every metric, decriminalization in Portugal has been a resounding success," says Glenn Greenwald, an attorney, author and fluent Portuguese speaker, who conducted the research. "It has enabled the Portuguese government to manage and control the drug problem far better than virtually every other Western country does."
Compared to the European Union and the U.S., Portugal's drug use numbers are impressive. Following decriminalization, Portugal had the lowest rate of lifetime marijuana use in people over 15 in the E.U.: 10%. The most comparable figure in America is in people over 12: 39.8%. Proportionally, more Americans have used cocaine than Portuguese have used marijuana.
​

Decriminalizing Drugs in Portugal a Success, Says Report - TIME

 

[JBeukema]

No they're not. There are lots of functional heroin addicts who go about their lives and no one knows who or what they suffer from.

There is an upper limit to functionality for a heroin addict that is significantly lower than a sober person.

Eventually the addiction catches up with you. Again, look at what happened with Methadone.

It was supposed to be a magic cure for heroin addiction. In the end people just traded one addiction for the other. The only benefit of methadone is that users avoid the needle and the criminal side in order to get their fix.

That being said, you don't see many productive members of society who are regulars at the methadone clinic.

I have many friends in law enforcement. One is a special agent for Californias Bureau of Narcotics Enforecment and he will disagree with you. He knows many people (I actually met one of them once) who have been heroin addicts since the 1960's. They live in San Francisco .

shocking...

 

[geauxtohell]

but they will be boosting the benzos, adderol, ritalin, vicodin, percocet, codeine, oxys et al. how is that different?

It's not. Which is why those substances are controlled.

and yet they get out on the street anyway. i certainly don't favor untrammeled access to rec drugs, but treating them the same as booze seems to me to be worth trying.

i've been wrong before, though

Sorry. I should have expanded on that. The fact that these items are controlled makes it much harder for the average teenager to gain access to them than booze and cigarettes, which can be obtained on every street corner.

I would imagine the percentage of teenagers who have raided their father's liquor cabinets dwarfs the percentage of teenagers who have raided the medicine cabinet. Even then, the percentage of American households that have liquor in them certainly dwarfs the percentage that have benzos and narcotics.

 

[JBeukema]

pure coke is MUCH cheaper than Meth.

where the fuck do you live?

 

[High_Gravity]

makes sense, then, that everyone here has voiced support for combining decriminalization with treatment

did we not mention Portugal?

I'm not sure whats going on with Portugal, did they actually legalize everything there?

Pop quiz: Which European country has the most liberal drug laws? (Hint: It's not the Netherlands.)
Although its capital is notorious among stoners and college kids for marijuana haze–filled "coffee shops," Holland has never actually legalized cannabis — the Dutch simply don't enforce their laws against the shops. The correct answer is Portugal, which in 2001 became the first European country to officially abolish all criminal penalties for personal possession of drugs, including marijuana, cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine.
At the recommendation of a national commission charged with addressing Portugal's drug problem, jail time was replaced with the offer of therapy. The argument was that the fear of prison drives addicts underground and that incarceration is more expensive than treatment — so why not give drug addicts health services instead? Under Portugal's new regime, people found guilty of possessing small amounts of drugs are sent to a panel consisting of a psychologist, social worker and legal adviser for appropriate treatment (which may be refused without criminal punishment), instead of jail.
The question is, does the new policy work? At the time, critics in the poor, socially conservative and largely Catholic nation said decriminalizing drug possession would open the country to "drug tourists" and exacerbate Portugal's drug problem; the country had some of the highest levels of hard-drug use in Europe. But the recently released results of a report commissioned by the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, suggest otherwise.
The paper, published by Cato in April, found that in the five years after personal possession was decriminalized, illegal drug use among teens in Portugal declined and rates of new HIV infections caused by sharing of dirty needles dropped, while the number of people seeking treatment for drug addiction more than doubled.
"Judging by every metric, decriminalization in Portugal has been a resounding success," says Glenn Greenwald, an attorney, author and fluent Portuguese speaker, who conducted the research. "It has enabled the Portuguese government to manage and control the drug problem far better than virtually every other Western country does."
Compared to the European Union and the U.S., Portugal's drug use numbers are impressive. Following decriminalization, Portugal had the lowest rate of lifetime marijuana use in people over 15 in the E.U.: 10%. The most comparable figure in America is in people over 12: 39.8%. Proportionally, more Americans have used cocaine than Portuguese have used marijuana.
​

Decriminalizing Drugs in Portugal a Success, Says Report - TIME

That is very interesting.

 

[del]

That very well maybe, I havent met one though. I know a few people who are heroin addicts and they are barely hanging onto basic jobs like working at fast food to support their habits and shacking up with other addicts, I definently wouldn't consider them valuable members of society.

I can say that for some of the booze hounds I've worked with.

There are plenty of congressman, governors, Military commanders, professional athletes, doctors and lawyers who are alcoholics, how many heroin addicts are in prominent positions? heroin addicts may be do ok as Rock Stars or something but what else can they do?

there have been plenty of high functioning drug addicts in positions of responsibility

 

[geauxtohell]

But again, this is where personal responsibility and good parenting come into play. My son can't sneak any of my cigarettes, beer or herion out to use.......because I don't have any. He has been raised in an environment where he has been taught what those things can do to you and has a life example to follow. He's my son, I'm his dad. What he does, who he does it with and where he goes is my business. Period, end of story. He is 17.5, an honors student in his senior year and just made Eagle Scout less than a month ago. He comes home everyday shaking his head and laughing about this kid or that kid who came to school drunk or high. He thinks they are idiots. He was given a good example and he has been exposed to the bad examples and he has come away from it with a personal decision of how he wants to live his life. He doesn't want to party, get high and flip burgers the rest of his life. He wants to take his scholarship and study engineering and live a lifestyle as good or better than his parents.
There is no reason that what happened in my house can't happen in others. But it takes a committment to good parenting and personal responsibility and providing the right kind of example. Not everyone else does that....and that is why I volunteer my time in Scouting to hopefully make a positive difference in other kid's lives as well. I can do that regardless of what the government deems legal or illegal to sell.

I really don't want people to take away from this that I think I'm better than anyone else or that I think I have all the answers. Life is a series of choices and we can ultimately only make those choices for ourselves. I can do all I've done and five years from now my son could become an addict. I don't think that will happen and I like to think that it is because I did it right. I really don't need the government limiting our freedom of choice to do my job as a parent.

I applaude you raising your son in a positive environment, but sometimes thats not enough. My brother is a heroin addict and we were raised in the same home, my father was not a drug addict, he did smoke and drink but never did drugs or had it in the home. But, in high school my brother was a big pothead and than later got into heroin, he said he could control it but he could not, one day my father came home and found that he sold everything in the house, fridge, coaches, beds, washers, etc EVERYTHING, to payback the credit he owed his drug dealer. Me and my brother are total opposites, I served 7 years in the Military and now hold a good job with the government, my brother dropped out of high school to do drugs, joined the Army but was sent back home in basic training because he tested positive for cocaine on the drug test, and is now serving time in Wasco State Penn in California for domestic violence, drug possession and various parole violations. Sometimes providing a good home is not enough.

True. Life is choices. All we can do as parents is point the right way and back it up by our example. But eventually, your children make their own choices and as painful as it is to watch, it is their choice. You can't change what they decide. My older brother was a pot head back in high school and I'm sure he did some harder stuff. At some point he grew out of it and turned back into a responsible and sensible person. He was married with two kids and finished his college education and has held a management position in a very large corporation for the past 30 years. Personal responsibility and freedom to choose.

I basically agree with both of you, with this caveat: why facilitate the ability of teenagers to gain access to dangerous substances? What benefit is their to society, other than buying into the libertarian mantra, that would make this a smart move on our part? While many kids will do the right thing with proper parenting (and some without it), some will still do the wrong thing.

Why increase the odds that the average rebellious teenager can get their hands on opiates, which they might not be able to kick, as opposed to alcohol which they probably will?

 

[JBeukema]

Alcoholics cause harm by their actions. However, there is no criminal enterprise that causes harm far beyond what the individual can do. Think Chicago in the 1930's.

Right. And this would be different with people who use methamphetamine, heroin, and/or cocaine because of why?

Like I said, if you remove the criminality of the matter, it doesn't change the fact that these substances are problematic unto themselves.

Again, what benefit to society, other than someone's personal political science experiment, does legalization provide?

how dense are you?

look at Mexico right now


go 'head


right now


those are called cartels


and they exist, in large part, because we made cocaine, heroine, and other drugs illegal

now... call the FBI and ask about cartel activities within the US- because they are here

 

[JBeukema]

Why wouldn't it? I have historical data to back up my opinion. What do you have?

All substances are not created equal and prohibition is not a "once size fits all" argument in favor of legalization.

As for what I have, I have the status quo in which kids will sneak out to smoke a cigarette or drink a beer, but generally not to shoot up on the heroin they boosted out of dad's drug cabinet.

but they will be boosting the benzos, adderol, ritalin, vicodin, percocet, codeine, oxys et al. how is that different?

simple: the people who make those gave more the reelection campaign..

 

[geauxtohell]

You guys are really comparing heroin to porn, booze and smokes?

Heroine and alcohol...


both are physically addictive


you can O.D. on both


in both cases, making them illegal created a huge black market and spawned brutal cartels and gangs that drove violent crime through the roof


both tend to abused by many people

....

so, please, explain to me how they're really so different

Heroin is much more addictive and much easier to overdose on.

It's also not deemed to be socially acceptable.

One reason prohibition was a disaster was that alcohol had previously been legal and was used by many Americans before they decided to make it illegal. Therefore, there was a huge demand for the product when it became illegal. While all illegal substances generate demand, the relative scope compared to alcohol is much smaller. That is why organized crime boomed. It was just the fact that something was made illegal. It was the fact that something a large portion of the society used was made illegal.

Furthermore, making alcohol illegal was a change from the status quo.

What good does it do our society to change the current status quo?

 

[geauxtohell]

You can 'O.D.' on water

Water intoxication - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Let's not be absurd, here.

You'll also die without water.

That is not the case with any recreational drug. Legal or not.

That is, unless you are already hooked to it and try and go cold turkey (which is the case with alcohol, benzos, and barbiturates).

 

[westwall]

But, as soon as you inject heroin its pretty much too late to try and stop the high right? I mean using heroin is not like sitting there and drinking beer after beer, you can always stop drinking after a certain amount but once you inject that needle how can you go back?

not everyone can do that, we call ourselves alcoholics.

addicts aren't any different than alcoholics in that there is something inside of them that drives the need to change how they feel. it isn't the drug that causes the addiction; it's the person using it, imo. there are probably people that could use heroin *socially*.

personally, i think it's foolish to allow one recreational drug (alcohol) to be legal and all the others are illegal when alcohol far and away causes more damage and misery to society.

I agree that alcohol is more dangerous to society. However, I would argue that is simply because of access as it is legal. This is the point that I think many of us are making.

Is it a hypocritical double standard that alcohol is legal and other drugs are illegal? You bet. However, the genie is out of the bottle with alcohol. You can't put it back.

Have you ever read histories of the Prohibition times and how the alcohol was just as plentiful only now you also had to deal with organised crime too? Has that completely passed you by?

 

[geauxtohell]

Just look at China post Opium Wars to see how things can turn out


But


then look at Portugal today to see a very different way things can go when done right

Interesting you mention that. My mother is a political scientist and we were just discussing legalizing MJ (which I am for and she is against) and she referenced the Opium Wars.

Though, in that case I don't think a comparison is that easy. Opium is incredibly addictive. To the point where it will drive men to violence. MJ, not so much.

Decriminalizing Drugs in Portugal a Success, Says Report - TIME

It's an interesting perspective, though Portugal is not the United States. Different societal values, etc. Furthermore, as has been suggested, there is debate about whether the Cato Institute's study was accurate.

The one thing that is certain, the world didn't end in Portugal when they decriminalized drugs.

I am not suggesting that would be the case here either. I just don't see any benefit to carte blanche legalization.

 

[geauxtohell]

But, as soon as you inject heroin its pretty much too late to try and stop the high right? I mean using heroin is not like sitting there and drinking beer after beer, you can always stop drinking after a certain amount but once you inject that needle how can you go back?

Hitting someone with Narcan not only stops the high, it causes a 180 turn so that the person goes through withdrawal and people tend to go a little apeshit when they get it. They try to avoid it unless it's absolutely necessary.

The real problem with opiates is the addictive potential they have. People that are hooked have a hard time kicking it. Legality isn't going to change that. The hallmark of addiction/dependence is using a substance regardless of negative consequences to include loss of job, family, etc. Chemical addiction is real. It's not simply a matter of being "weak". Legalizing opiates only removes criminal sanctions for an addict. It doesn't change the fact that people that are addicted to opiates are non-productive.

I don't think we need to contribute to social Darwinism in the name of individual liberty.

Now where else have I heard this language....?

Removing those criminal sanctions is best for society as a whole.

Just look at the incarceration rate and the social and fiscal costs of maintaining a massive prison system

And do you really think prison addresses the problem of addiction- or the underlying issues that led to abuse?

If you do, I'd love to hear you explain the recidivism rate

And how many people get out of prison for drug possession, have difficulty finding work, and then turn to other crimes to support themselves? The 'War on Drugs' is manufacturing criminals.

I am all in favor of a more progressive policy towards people who are addicted to drugs. I have no problem with trying rehab before prison either.

Neither of those approaches necessitate making them legal.

 

[JBeukema]

I just don't see any benefit to carte blanche legalization.

I'm pretty sure everyone here favours decriminalization/regulation of some sort and not 'carte blanche legalization'. Many seem to support basing the laws around those surrounding alcohol and tobacco.

 

[westwall]

I am someone who has never been drunk or stoned in my life. It has frankly never interested me. I watched my dad as a youngster and saw the effects it had on him and said to myself eww, i don't want to look like that when I get up in the morning! His brother my uncle obviously died of drug in the 1980's. He wasn't high at the time but had used so many hard drugs he just kicked off from a heart attck.

People like them can't be saved. But the youngster laying in their bed can. I don't care what happens to addicts, I really don't. I do care about all of those innocent people who have died because some asshole has decided he would rather be a killer drug dealer than a productive member of society.

Legalisation puts those pricks out of work.

So it took you personally experiencing how destructive substance abuse can be after watching it harm your family members to decide that using these things was a bad idea for you?

Why do you think this is a good idea, again?

Because I have also read history and the only effect of criminalization has been to get a lot of innocent people killed. How many were killed during Prohibition who were not involved in the booze trade? How many innocent people have been killed in teh various drug wars now goin on around the world? Mexico alone has seen 22,000 people killed THIS YEAR in the various drug gang wars. Most are innocent bystanders. Are you so blind that you can't see this?

 

[geauxtohell]

not everyone can do that, we call ourselves alcoholics.

addicts aren't any different than alcoholics in that there is something inside of them that drives the need to change how they feel. it isn't the drug that causes the addiction; it's the person using it, imo. there are probably people that could use heroin *socially*.

personally, i think it's foolish to allow one recreational drug (alcohol) to be legal and all the others are illegal when alcohol far and away causes more damage and misery to society.

I agree that alcohol is more dangerous to society. However, I would argue that is simply because of access as it is legal. This is the point that I think many of us are making..

we tried doing things your way, retard
Prohibition — History.com Articles, Video, Pictures and Facts

And this thread was progressing so nicely.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/3146053-post193.html