Legalise Drugs

In the interest of balance, I should point out that Colombia is by no means solely responsible for the drugs trade. A pretty big chunk of the heroin comes from Afghanistan. I agree that the approach of criminalising drug users hasn't worked very well but I'm not completely convinced that legalisation would be quite as successful as you suggest in most cases. For one thing, most users of cannabis, cocaine and ecstacy - three of the most popular legal drugs - aren't physically addicted to them. Medical services will have a limited effect on people who are currently making a genuine choice about their recreational risk taking. Whether or not legalisation would immediately lead to more recreational drug use, it would certainly lead to more open use which in the long-term probably would lead to an increase in use. That said, I think you're right about crack and heroin. And I'm not completely against legalising the others, I just think the question of what would happen afterwards is a bit more complicated than you're suggesting.

legalize drugs? Are u serious styxbroox? maybe marijuana but cocaine and heroin? sorry but I'm against any legalization of harmful drugs, hell I'd get rid of cigarettes to if I could.

In terms of heroin, there's evidence that - where it's been tried - treating heroin addiction as a medical problem rather than a crime is very successful. I wouldn't suggest selling heroin in shops. Cocaine, I probably would.

okay alchohal is bad, it kills, and it's legal. So your solution is to legalize more harmful drugs? Cocaine and heroin are deadly, same as alchohal and cigarettes, but you never see people getting murdered over a drink or a pack of smokes do you?

It'll be interesting to keep abreast of the developments in Mexico. I'm so horny this weekend. Check this out: http://www.imps-elfs.nl/ Hear my music: http://music.download.com/3600-5-100795586.html

Good point Mike, and actually is why more is spent on the treatment of class a drugs than alcohol. Though more probably suffer from alcoholism it isn't affecting wider society as a whole. Yeah sure it presents problems for the nearest and dearest but they can always walk away, a burglary victim seldom even knows the burglar yet they have to go home and deal with the effects of the burglary. I say this as osmeone who's been heavily involved in the scene. I have lost countless friends through addiction. On the other hand I would legalise drugs, in the late sixties doctors could prescribe heroin, back then it was the middle class uni types on a world tour to 'find themselves' that came back addicted to heroin. stopping doctors from prescribing is what pushed smack to dealers leading to people that would have otherwise never come into contact with heroin to come into contact with it, hence the rise in addiction alongside to the aforementioned ban (obviously unforeseen). A little drug history, incidentally the egyptians wouldn't sign the opium treaty in the 1800's unless canabis was included, why? becaud=se they believed in the links to mental illness, you know the ones they're shouting about in the UK since the declassification. I would legalise it though for the same reasons as reinstating alcohol in the US, the mob grew huge because of prohabition, fact. The other factor is the amount it costs the UK in taxes, ie prison courts. It shouldn't be sold in shops though, fuck the government and it's taxes, it should be in the hands of doctors. People should take in mind that one shipment through equals the profit of about eight, meaning for every eight sent only one needs to reach it's destination, customs would locate one in maybe twenty if they're very lucky. nobody. The only thing I'd have against it is there are many young people from disadvantaged areas in life where selling drugs is their only way out.

Not so many get killed over booze and fags because you can get your hands on them, ie they're legal. That's the idea behind legalising hard drugs. If people are going to take them, they're going to take them, so to save them the bother of coming round your house and robbing you, perhaps it should be prescribed. As has been mentioned, the experiment with prescribing heroin in Liverpool a few decades back resulted in a sharp drop in crime, less overdoses, and stabilisation of lifestyle amongst addicts. No-one in this country has ever advocated selling smack legally as a recreational drug: legalisiation refers to prescribing. In other words you wouldn't get it if you weren't already fucked.

"Cocaine and heroin are dealy, same as alchohal and cigarettes, but you never see people getting murdered over a drink or a pack of smokes do you?" In terms of heroin, at least, people get murdered because people are trying to get hold of it illegally rather than because people are using. The average person on heroin - though usually not in a great place themselves - is far less likely to attack someone else than your average person who's been drinking lots of alcohol.

we should've never made these drugs in the first place, oh well, I guess legalizing it wouldn't be so bad.

Styx... A "Dago-Wop" is an Italian, not a Mexican. I think Mexico is tired of putting people in prison for being stupid and would rather spend their time/money on criminals.

I'd go along with Nobody.

WOP - Without Official Papers nobody

Actually, for all his glaring faults, Dubya is actually in pretty good tune with the Mexican immigrant issue. He is, after all, a Texan. Texas has a very high Hispanic population. He is on pretty good terms with the Mexico government. One of his few strong points in my opinion; he is not a bigot when it concerns the Mexicans. Surprise! He has to tow the line to some degree with his party, which for all intensions would advocate closing the border and guarding it with the Army, which would be a seriously stupid thing to do. On this issue, I consider him to be very moderate, possibly liberal, from his party perspective. Where he fails is on his general approach to foreign policy. He has that same old tired view that America can't possibly do anything that the rest of the world would consider a good thing, and that he knows best what is good for America. End result, he is like following a horse in a parade. All you get in his path is horse shit. The next poor bastard to take office is gonna need a very large shovel to clean up the damage.

Legalisation is the only sensible way to go. One only has to look at the incredible amounts of money that the US administration has thrown at the "War On Drugs" to see how fruitless it is to get 'hardline' on drugs in the UK. The Americans have spent more fighting the War on drugs than any other country ever has or ever will and did they stop it? Did they even slow it down? Drug related deaths are almost entirely down to one very simple scenario. Because of the illegal status of drugs, they are a valuable commodity, and as such are sold (at street level) by someone who is trying to make as much money as possible (often to fund their own habits). This coupled with the fact that the source is never guaranteed, means that the average dealer will cut what they buy with a 'filler'. It is this practice which means that the average heroin addict will get a vast difference in the quality (strength) of what they buy... usually it is tainted... but sometimes... just sometimes... it is 100% what it says on the tin. This is a major cause of overdose, the sudden jump in quality. That is if the filler does'nt lead to poisoning first. It is the very prohibition of these drugs that make them worth the money they are. If these drugs were freely available (100% clean) at rock bottom prices, the bottom would fall out of the market for all involved. The growers would still sell their crop (and strangely would get a better price if it were sold as a cash crop as an export), which would lift poverty at that end of the trade. The drugs cartels would have no mark up to make, the dealers would not have enough of a return to bother doing it. Whichever drug you can name... somewhere in the world..... there are still users of it.... even unfashionable drugs will still have their fans somewhere. All drugs find their audience. And it is natural for people to say 'but if these drugs were available over the counter our children will become junkies.... well news flash.... our children ARE ALREADY BECOMING JUNKIES'. And they are paying top whack, buying from the seediest people society has to offer, have no idea of what is in what they are buying and are still sticking it in their arms up their noses down their necks. Now.... Do you prefer that they continue as is.... or would you prefer to know that: A) They are getting what they think they are getting. B) They are unlikely to be stabbed while buying it. C) They will never be in the situation where they are pawning the telly to get more. Your thoughts.

Some damned good points on this thread.

And some fucking stupid ones as well.

ha ha ha indeed George jude "Cacoethes scribendi" http://www.judesworld.net

"It is the very prohibition of these drugs that make them worth the money they are. If these drugs were freely available (100% clean) at rock bottom prices, the bottom would fall out of the market for all involved. The growers would still sell their crop (and strangely would get a better price if it were sold as a cash crop as an export), which would lift poverty at that end of the trade. The drugs cartels would have no mark up to make, the dealers would not have enough of a return to bother doing it." I think the ending prohibition = milk + honey approach is taking things a bit far. This is really a side issue (from the self-interested point of view of us in the West) but I think third world cultivaters of the raw materials for regulated global capitalist recreation drug trade would be almost as equally screwed in the post-prohibition world as they are now. Just ask the people currently trying to make a living growing coffee beans and bananas. In terms of how things would work here, while I think ending prohibition is the right idea in the long-term and decriminalisation is the right idea in the short term, it certainly isn't simple. Some forms of cannabis probably could be sold over the counter in news agents and manufactured in the traditional unpleasant fashion by Phillip Morris and co. But with some of the 'harder' currently illegal drugs, setting up a regulated legit recreational drugs economy, to take the place of the black economy would be an extremely complicated business. Particularly in terms of working who'd be allowed to the selling and buying and the level of responsibility the state would take for the consequences.