Opinions - What would be the benefits for drug legalization?

[wellhelm]

Swim would like to hear it. He has his own beliefs but would like to hear from this forum why it would be beneficial to leagalize drugs and maybe how it would work.
Also, should all drugs be made legal? Should each person be regulated to avoid addiction or should it be totaly be up to the individual. The easy way out is to say its up to the individual, but at what point, if any, does society become resposible?

[wellhelm]

Swim guess'es he will kick start this.

It would stop the waste of billions of tax dollars on the war on drugs.

It would releases the inprisonment of over 1million non-violent drug offenses.

Just a couple, please continue!

[Lunar Loops]

Just take a look at the following file in the Law file archive. It is from Transform Drug Policy Foundation (http://www.tdpf.org.uk/).

http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/loc...d=638&catid=15

[darawk]

It would cut off the biggest source of funds for criminal operations in existence. Every time a new drug gets scheduled the mafia and colombian cartels jump for joy. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to find out that they actually indirectly lobby for tighter drug legislation in congress.

[Bajeda]

From the DF file archive, this would probably helpful to you.

[wellhelm]

Lets pretend that the archive did not exsist! Now what does swiy think? I am looking for indivdual fact.

[Bajeda]

Originally Posted by wellhelm

Lets pretend that the archive did not exsist! Now what does swiy think? I am looking for indivdual fact.

lol its sort of hard considering that archive file fits my viewpoint quite well. I could elaborate further but I would need about 40-50 pages to do so and I don't have time presently. Maybe in the future I'll get to writing out my thoughts on the matter, but for now videos like the leap one and the pdf I linked to are pretty good for expressing my opinion succinctly.

[Woodman]

It would open up new markets for trade, like other commodities: cotton, corn, orange juice, gold, etc.

This new LEGITIMATE market would then be a new source of tax revenue.

[grecian]

There are also what i class as indirect effects of prohibition, such as not being able to use MDMA for therapy and the numerous uses for hemp that have been left by the wayside:

http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/sho...p+paper+cotton


I also just stumbled accross this:

http://www.urban75.com/Drugs/drugten.html

[Solidly-here]

What would be the benefits for drug legalization?

Hmm. My favorite would be 10,000 un-employed DEA agents.

[Nature Boy]

The single greatest benefit would be a deep reduction in crime. Almost all violent crime is drug-related. Take the commodity of the violent dealers and they have nothing to peddle, therefore they're done for. Prisons won't be over-crowded, innocent people won't be shot on the streets (unless by the police of course). Implementing full-scale legalisation would be very difficult however because it's already such a bureaucratic mess. Decriminalization is a much more realistic goal.

[wasted_youth]

Decriminalization is a much more realistic goal.

While it is much more realistic, it fails to help.
Dealers must still deal.
While people may be more open about there habits as a result, the question is really whats in it for the average drug user? And in my opinion.
Not Alot.
Most casual drug users never have to deal with the police, and while there is still that nudging fear and paranoia, it rarely eventuates into anything.

While legalization seeems like a dream come true at first with a little thought it can become less of a good idea. The last thing I want is Joe Average on the bus with me in the morning coming down from his morning crack hit. Or a drunk rowdy mob on meth. It could make everyday situations seem so much worse.

Except for a few exotic things most common drugs are never too far away anyway, provided you know the right people.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Good post buddy.

[CrookedEye]

Originally Posted by wasted_youth

While it is much more realistic, it fails to help.
Dealers must still deal.
While people may be more open about there habits as a result, the question is really whats in it for the average drug user? And in my opinion.
Not Alot.
Most casual drug users never have to deal with the police, and while there is still that nudging fear and paranoia, it rarely eventuates into anything.

While legalization seeems like a dream come true at first with a little thought it can become less of a good idea. The last thing I want is Joe Average on the bus with me in the morning coming down from his morning crack hit. Or a drunk rowdy mob on meth. It could make everyday situations seem so much worse.

Except for a few exotic things most common drugs are never too far away anyway, provided you know the right people.

Any longtime or real experience with a drug should open a youngins mind to what can and will happen to anyone who is caught, not just hardcore drug dealers.. SWIM bets the reason SWIY feels this way is because they are still very young and haven't been in the position where they are found with even an 1/8 of felony drugs.. That 1/8 of mushrooms that would have been a great night, on 90% of the occasions, can turn into a felony drug possession that fucks up employment opportunities for the rest of ones life, not to mention schooling grants, etc.. Let's see then how little the drug war effects SWIY...

BTW, how does SWIY know the guy who gets on the bus in the am with SWIY isn't just done hitting a crack pipe?? SWIY has a very narrowminded view of drugs that will probably soon be stripped away when they come into any real contact with true drug users... Not everyone is the stereotypical junky...

[wasted_youth]

Originally Posted by CrookedEye

Any longtime or real experience with a drug should open a youngins mind to what can and will happen to anyone who is caught, not just hardcore drug dealers.. SWIM bets the reason SWIY feels this way is because they are still very young and haven't been in the position where they are found with even an 1/8 of felony drugs.. That 1/8 of mushrooms that would have been a great night, on 90% of the occasions, can turn into a felony drug possession that fucks up employment opportunities for the rest of ones life, not to mention schooling grants, etc.. Let's see then how little the drug war effects SWIY...

BTW, how does SWIY know the guy who gets on the bus in the am with SWIY isn't just done hitting a crack pipe?? SWIY has a very narrowminded view of drugs that will probably soon be stripped away when they come into any real contact with true drug users... Not everyone is the stereotypical junky...

It is much more the case of the casual recreational user not being caught. Police don't walk the streets with sniffer dogs, nor do random searches of peoples property.
SWIW is aware he isn't in America, nor is he going to pretend he knows the way things work there. So if things are different for other's he apoligizes and wants to hear other peoples thoughts and the way things work them.
He has had his fair share of experiences and probably isn't as young as SWIY thinks. Though he has never had charges laid against him, several of SWIWs friends have and they know where they made mistakes. Enough of them have just been carelessness.
There are definatly aspects of legalization that are appealing. It would be a benefit to know how much of an active ingredient is in what, and SWIW can't see himself complaining. Just wanted to offer another side to this & share his thoughts.
In regards to the guy on the bus, SWIW was just saying that in short, drug use would increase. There are negative effects to some drugs, these negative effects wouldn't just affect the taker. SWIW doesn't know if its fair to say this but most drug takers are reasonably considerate and don't flaunt their habits around others. If all drugs were legalized it could be a different story.
SWIW's views on drug user's aren't narrow-minded, it is those that would use drugs if they were legal that my views are more conservative about.

But hey, convince SWIW of your perspective

[Nature Boy]

Originally Posted by wasted_youth

While it is much more realistic, it fails to help.
Dealers must still deal.
While people may be more open about there habits as a result, the question is really whats in it for the average drug user? And in my opinion.
Not Alot.
Most casual drug users never have to deal with the police, and while there is still that nudging fear and paranoia, it rarely eventuates into anything.

While legalization seeems like a dream come true at first with a little thought it can become less of a good idea. The last thing I want is Joe Average on the bus with me in the morning coming down from his morning crack hit. Or a drunk rowdy mob on meth. It could make everyday situations seem so much worse.

Except for a few exotic things most common drugs are never too far away anyway, provided you know the right people.

SWIM is a casual drug user and has been publicly searched and humiliated by police without even having anything on him at the time. Perhaps this isn't a problem where you are, but it is a problem where he is. That is why decriminalization of less dangerous substances is important. In Ireland, Gardaí spend a lot of their time randomly searching people around city centers at night as they are instructed to search for drugs. Wouldn't it be much more worthwhile to patrol around breaking up the increasing amount of brawls that break out? That's just one benefit, there are several others e.g. allowed to grow your own marijuana at home, profit is removed from street dealers.

SWIM wonders whether full legalisation of all drugs is a good idea because he has similar concerns. However, as far as the whole prohibition argument goes, I have not once come across an individual who has come up with one valid reason why marijuana should be illegal.

[Benga]

crime reduction : taking substances away from criminal organisations, reducing and controling prices hence drastically cutting the value of the products and thus attraction for a criminal market, reducing user related crimality by cutting away the need for money and association with criminals.
prison population reduction.

financial : government income either through sales control or through the diminution in amounts spent on the war on drugs. Running medical and social councelling centers instead of drug fighting agencies requires different types of fundings.

user safety : with a control of the substances, one could actually know what one is using, have proper information and usage conditions, and have access to information and councelling, addiction issues could be dealt with as social and medical issues, reduction of overdose risks, users would no longer need to associate with criminals, or because of the fixed low prices of substances, need large amounts of money to use.

reduction of the attraction of drug use : by exposing the reality of drug use, cutting away the drug mystique and mythology, association with a counter culture, substance use could be approached openly, with the positive and negative aspects, and the possible medical and social problems a specific substance might cause. It would also help acknowledge that a desire for substance use is a drive present in many individuals, and that there is nothing morally wrong with this, but that it can, like other activities, become problematic, and should thus be approached in a mature and reasonable manner.

some of swim's thoughts on the subject

http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/s...ead.php?t=1262

http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/s...ad.php?t=12055

http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/s...ad.php?t=12524

damn...the threads have moved...i'll go hunting for them

b

[Trebor]

Taking money away from crime syndicates and using it to fund education and treatment centres for the substances legalized.

[Jadegreen]

Any 'violent' drug user is probably committing some other crime anyway (That 'drunk rowdy mob on meth' - wouldn't rowdy = disturbing the peace?)

So if drugs are legalized, but other crimes still punished, the non-violent recreational users are left alone, and the violent users are being punished for their own crimes. Drug use should be a personal decision; the government shouldn't be able to regulate what one wants to put in their body, is SWIM's personal opinion. Too bad not everyone thought like her.

One question to think about with legalization - what restrictions would be placed? 21 like alcohol, 18 like everything else? (in the USA) SWIM would hope, if there is to be legalization in her lifetime, that they would have some sense of regulation. But then you have children who choose to abuse coricidin, or inhalents because they have nothing else. It is a complicated issue.

[420lb]

Swim thinks if drugs are legalized, another source of economic deviance will take its place.

[grandbaby]

The majority view out in the world (rigorous scientific polls conducted by me earlier this year by randomly asking friends and acquaintances o' mine) appears to be that marijuana should be legalized, but not much else. Some support for legalization of MDMA and/or psychedelics was found, but nobody thought that cocaine or heroin should be legalized.

That was my position, too, until I began lurking around drugboards such as this one. It was then that I realized that
a) the logic of supply and demand applies equally to so-called "hard" drugs as to so-called "soft" ones, and that to my surprise the users of meth and coke and opiates I encountered here weren't any different than, or at least weren't inferior to, users of substances I considered more "respectable,"
b) that the benefits of harm reduction of current users in the case of commonly adulterated drugs such as heroin and MDMA far outweighs the potential additional problems of habituation and addiction of new users,
c) that Joe Average is as unlikely to hit the ol' crack pipe on the way to work as he is to down a mickey of vodka with his Wheaties, i.e. that abstention and/or responsible recreational use would by far be the norm, as with alcohol at present,
d) that most people prefer alcohol to other drugs and will continue to do so even after other drugs are legalized; most people don't like the psychedelic state; most people don't want to get cranked up and amped up or go on the nod; they want to get bubbly and gregarious, then slurry and blurry and dim.

We wouldn't likely see a massive sustained increase in the use of newly legal drugs, and certainly any increase in problems would be more than offset by resources made newly available, unbiased (or at least, hopefully, less biased) education, removal of the criminal stigma that prevents so many addicted users from seeking help, and so on. If you think it all through and get rid of the images you've been imprinted with from watching too many episodes of "COPS", you can only come to one conclusion: That the legalization and regulation of all psychoactive substances by the government (as with alcohol) is the only way to militate against the "drug problem."

[bottlekop]

non-violent drug users should not be discriminated against.

if some drug users are harmful to society; this is often because the drugs are illeagal. This means that the potencial for criminal acttivity to get them is higher because they have to interact with an illeagal market (this is not always the case though). Many non-violent; recreational users are forced to work with the illeagal market(they still have jobs and support their own private pleasures and beliefs) . Most of the harmful people would be violent and commit wicked crimes all on there own; drugs or not. they would find other selfish mottives; more money; power etc... (this is not saying drugs are selfish; but that those people value their being high more than the rights and bellongings of others)

90% of the problems with drugs can be solved by their legalization.
The problems it would solve:

1) safety (to a large extent) - properly funded research; no drugs cut with dangerous substances; far more open pollicy so rehabbilitation from addiction will be more likely.

2)social - people shuned and rejected for their beliefs and recreation will be protected like any other citizen (who has their right to freedom of religion and of expression). More open pollicy = better response from people (for those with addiction problem etc..). Less Propaganda will be out there; and... it could Even be replaced with Facts(Now that would be something to see!). this would restore a lot of trust in government etc...

the other 10% will be:

1) the possibillity of addiction (although it will be greatly lowered with the right information available).

2)the possibillity of over-dose (greatly lowered by right information being available; and by havving know quantities(sp) in each hit of a drug-
eg. a tablette from a pharmacy(sp) contains exactly what it says on the box, mostly anyway. Drugs could be sold in the same way. Also no dangerous extras/ unsafe combinations)

This will also take the powerful ecconomic force of drug sales from crimminals; and givving it to the people (and to the government -> tax)
More money going to tax will result in roads; schools etc.. benifitting. (at least it should) All people can bennifit from better public ammeanities(sp).

In swibk's country (South Africa) many people would bennifit from the jobs created by a leagal drug industry (mostly controlled by illeagal immigrants - illeagally that is ). South Africa has about a 40% unemployment rate.
Not to mention the money and jobs generated by drug-realated tourism.

I think the way to solve hunger in underprivalidged(sp) african countries (eg. Ethiopia(sp) not that S.A is underprivaledged; it's just a little under "jobbed") would be to get drugs leagalized. Give them a very profitable industry that is non-violent (as aposed to arms manufacture; illeagal arms trade). Not the "donate food and money" approach; it doesn't work. That way people never get to have anything of their own. If their is no economy in a country; generaly the people are quite poor.

The idea of makking drugs illeagal; came from confussing "leagal & illeagal" with "wrong and right".