First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Legalizing ALL Drugs
27244 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 6/5/13

WednesdayBookLove wrote:


Morbidhanson wrote:

I am actually for this, although drugs with no recreational or commercial value that are so deadly that people pretty much die or suffer soon after they take them are probably not on my list.

I'm for legal drugs as long as measures are taken to inform people about the goods and bads of what they are doing. There will also need to be laws in place regulating what one can or can't do while on drugs. Driving, for instance.


You do realize people are going to ignore the regulations and abuse the privileges, right? The idea sounds nice in your head, and if people were more respectful and didn't take advantage of things, maybe this theory would work. Unfortunately, in the case of legalizing drugs like this, we can't trust everybody to use them intelligently or respectfully. People aren't supposed to drink and drive or even technically talk/text and drive, but they do anyway. What's to say they wouldn't drive while so high they can barely function?


I suppose people will do what they want to do, true, but BECAUSE they do that regardless of the laws that are or aren't in place, why demonize drugs like we have done now? It would be a simple thing to have high taxes on drugs, and their regulation will make them more 'safe' (many drugs are unsafe due to shady labs and uncontrolled production). As everything in life, it's all about moderation. People would be much more open-minded and realistic in their thoughts regarding drugs. Misinformation these days regarding drugs, keeping us in the dark and feeding us info...this sort of dishonesty is not acceptable, IMO. Many people just hear "drugs" and then they flip. Why? Many haven't actually done them and are just reacting based on the information they've been fed throughout their childhood lives. I'd rather have all drugs legalized and be realistically and thoroughly informed about them. This would also get rid of the need for drug cartels, they would have no reason to exist.
5656 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F
Offline
Posted 6/5/13


I think drug education can be successful without the legalization of drugs. I can see your point that regulating and perhaps even taxing sounds like a really good idea, but this doesn't mean the stigma surrounding drugs or drug cartels will disappear, especially right after drugs are legalized. You're right, I haven't done any drugs (my epilepsy meds don't count) but that doesn't mean I know nothing about drugs. Okay, so I'm no expert, but it's quite the generalization to assume that anyone who hasn't done drugs knows next to nothing about them. Besides, you can try to educate a person as much as you want, but if they don't want to listen, there is nothing you can do about that.
Scientist Moderator
digs 
48106 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 6/5/13 , edited 6/5/13

Morbidhanson wrote:

I am actually for this, although drugs with no recreational or commercial value that are so deadly that people pretty much die or suffer soon after they take them are probably not on my list.

I'm for legal drugs as long as measures are taken to inform people about the goods and bads of what they are doing. There will also need to be laws in place regulating what one can or can't do while on drugs. Driving, for instance.


Part of the problem though is that drugs are very addictive. People can be educated on the dangers of drugs, but really there isn't much window for safe use conditions when it comes to drugs like meth, cocaine, and heroine. People become chemically addicted to them, taking them at higher doses when they begin to develop tolerance, and start a downward spiral. No matter how educated someone is their body is still going to grow addicted to the substance and they will have withdrawal if they discontinue.
5656 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F
Offline
Posted 6/5/13
Just the irony of his argument. Says we should educate people more about drug use, but doesn't seem to be real educated in drugs himself. Or how people or politics work.
27244 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 6/5/13 , edited 6/5/13

WednesdayBookLove wrote:



I think drug education can be successful without the legalization of drugs. I can see your point that regulating and perhaps even taxing sounds like a really good idea, but this doesn't mean the stigma surrounding drugs or drug cartels will disappear, especially right after drugs are legalized. You're right, I haven't done any drugs (my epilepsy meds don't count) but that doesn't mean I know nothing about drugs. Okay, so I'm no expert, but it's quite the generalization to assume that anyone who hasn't done drugs knows next to nothing about them. Besides, you can try to educate a person as much as you want, but if they don't want to listen, there is nothing you can do about that.


It could be, but it can't be doubted that someone with only head knowledge about something and no actual experiences usually will not have the depth of understanding that a former user has about the effect and the issue of abuse. Sort of like how you can read about swimming and study the physics of water your entire life but it won't be the same as getting into that pool and swimming yourself, and it won't be the same sort of understanding that the pearl diver in a third-world country has about swimming. There are subtle nuances that words do not convey, that are equally important to the overall experience. I did not say non-users know nothing, merely that they are only reacting based on what others have been telling them without any genuine immersion of their actual selves in the issue. And that seems to be true.



Addiction needs to be covered by the education system. And, no, just because a drug is known to be physiologically addictive does not automatically mean that a person who uses the drug will surely become addicted and will be unable to prevent themselves from using the substance. Tobacco and alcohol, for instance, have been known to be addictive. Yet not everyone who has smoked and drank has become addicted. It is the same for things that may be psychologically addicting, like gambling. It all boils down to self-control and how someone chooses to prioritize his/her life and choose their habits, IMO. The ability for a substance to be physiologically addicting merely adds to the dangers of poor decision-making over long periods of time. Ultimately, it's the person's fault if they know and keep doing it anyway, not the drug's.

You are right. A person can be very educated but still a drug abuser. However, this development of bad habits can't be controlled by the government. Educating people about drugs and their effects may not completely prevent people from abusing them, but it certainly will increase awareness and decrease the likelihood of severe abuse.



And you are so educated about drugs and how people and politics work? I'm sharing my opinion and I understand that my view may be radical. But please debate in a civil way.
Scientist Moderator
digs 
48106 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 6/5/13 , edited 6/5/13

Morbidhanson wrote:

Addiction needs to be covered by the education system. And, no, just because a drug is known to be physiologically addictive does not automatically mean that a person who uses the drug will surely become addicted and will be unable to prevent themselves from using the substance. Tobacco and alcohol, for instance, have been known to be addictive. Yet not everyone who has smoked and drank has become addicted. It is the same for things that may be psychologically addicting, like gambling. It all boils down to self-control and how someone chooses to prioritize his/her life and choose their habits, IMO. The ability for a substance to be physiologically addicting merely adds to the dangers of poor decision-making over long periods of time. Ultimately, it's the person's fault if they know and keep doing it anyway, not the drug's.

You are right. A person can be very educated but still a drug abuser. However, this development of bad habits can't be controlled by the government. Educating people about drugs and their effects may not completely prevent people from abusing them, but it certainly will increase awareness and decrease the likelihood of severe abuse.


If the drug is physiologically addictive then the person will crave it and go through withdrawal if they deprive themselves of it. Withdrawal for many illegal drugs is extremely serious, people can have seizures and many require hospitalization. These drugs are also very bad for the body and have serious overdose consequences. The aren't safe at all to use, the cause individuals to become chemically addicted to it and they are hard to go off. I see no reason why they should be legal and regularly distributed. Tobacco is chemically addictive, people who quit smoking go through withdrawal and many use nicotine replacements (like patches or gum) to step down gradually and prevent withdrawal and satisfy cravings without smoking. Alcohol is not chemically addictive, it's psychologically addictive (pretty much anything can be psychologically addictive). A meth, cocaine, or heroine user will not be able to just stop taking drugs by their own willpower and be fine the next day. They will go through very serious and dangerous withdrawals.

Should we abolish the prescription system? These drugs are far more harmful than nearly all drugs behind a pharmacy counter. We require prescriptions for medications that need to be monitored by healthcare professionals because those drugs are not safe for just anyone to take. Why should methamphetamine be legal while Nexium remains a prescription? Nexium is far far safer yet you have to have a prescription to get it. Should all drugs be legalized and over the counter?

Educating people would not remove the public health problem. Keeping drugs illegal doesn't stop everyone from doing drugs, making anything illegal won't reduce incidences of that act being done to 0. However, keeping these drugs illegal and not easily accessible to the public while making it a crime to use and sell them is a better policy. I think for non-violent drug abusers the legal system should focus on rehab and not punishment/jail time, but I don't think drugs should be legalized for anyone to buy. It would do more harm than good. I'm all for increasing education, but I do not support legalization.
27244 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 6/6/13 , edited 6/6/13

digs wrote:


Morbidhanson wrote:

Addiction needs to be covered by the education system. And, no, just because a drug is known to be physiologically addictive does not automatically mean that a person who uses the drug will surely become addicted and will be unable to prevent themselves from using the substance. Tobacco and alcohol, for instance, have been known to be addictive. Yet not everyone who has smoked and drank has become addicted. It is the same for things that may be psychologically addicting, like gambling. It all boils down to self-control and how someone chooses to prioritize his/her life and choose their habits, IMO. The ability for a substance to be physiologically addicting merely adds to the dangers of poor decision-making over long periods of time. Ultimately, it's the person's fault if they know and keep doing it anyway, not the drug's.

You are right. A person can be very educated but still a drug abuser. However, this development of bad habits can't be controlled by the government. Educating people about drugs and their effects may not completely prevent people from abusing them, but it certainly will increase awareness and decrease the likelihood of severe abuse.


If the drug is physiologically addictive then the person will crave it and go through withdrawal if they deprive themselves of it. Withdrawal for many illegal drugs is extremely serious, people can have seizures and many require hospitalization. These drugs are also very bad for the body and have serious overdose consequences. The aren't safe at all to use, the cause individuals to become chemically addicted to it and they are hard to go off. I see no reason why they should be legal and regularly distributed. Tobacco is chemically addictive, people who quit smoking go through withdrawal and many use nicotine replacements (like patches or gum) to step down gradually and prevent withdrawal and satisfy cravings without smoking. Alcohol is not chemically addictive, it's psychologically addictive (pretty much anything can be psychologically addictive). A meth, cocaine, or heroine user will not be able to just stop taking drugs by their own willpower and be fine the next day. They will go through very serious and dangerous withdrawals.

Should we abolish the prescription system? These drugs are far more harmful than nearly all drugs behind a pharmacy counter. We require prescriptions for medications that need to be monitored by healthcare professionals because those drugs are not safe for just anyone to take. Why should methamphetamine be legal while Nexium remains a prescription? Nexium is far far safer yet you have to have a prescription to get it. Should all drugs be legalized and over the counter?

Educating people would not remove the public health problem. Keeping drugs illegal doesn't stop everyone from doing drugs, making anything illegal won't reduce incidences of that act being done to 0. However, keeping these drugs illegal and not easily accessible to the public while making it a crime to use and sell them is a better policy. I think for non-violent drug abusers the legal system should focus on rehab and not punishment/jail time, but I don't think drugs should be legalized for anyone to buy. It would do more harm than good. I'm all for increasing education, but I do not support legalization.


Addiction does not develop instantly, physiologically or psychologically. The duration and amount needed for physiological dependence varies with the individual. During that time, as it is during the first time, it is the user's choice to keep on using the substance. Many drug users overdose and/or otherwise are harmed by overuse because there's no established value on how much of something a person can take without harming themselves. I believe the dose makes the poison. In small enough doses, it is possible to enjoy the effects of many drugs. Alcohol IS physiologically addictive. Quitting cold turkey has been known to cause deaths due to problems such as organ failure. The body is so used to processing all that alcohol that it attempts its thing without the alcohol being there. A meth of coke user IS able to just stop, as long as they don't have a long record of routine or frequent use. Establishing guidelines regarding drug use and making sure none of it is being made on faulty equipment with poisonous additives by amateur chemists will work better to protect people already using drugs than will just a ban on drugs (as we can see with currently banned and commonly-abused ones).

Prescription drugs are technically legal. You just need that prescription from your doc to get them (and we all know it's easy for some people to fake their way into getting a prescription). Just as some straight-up illegal drugs are more harmful than prescription meds, there are some that are LESS harmful than prescription meds. The issue so far is that there's an indistinct line between how potentially harmful a drug must be before it is made illegal. There are some schedule 1 things that have almost no adverse physical effects on the body (such as magic mushrooms and peyote that can occur naturally in the wild, MDMA when taken in careful doses). I personally think that the government arbitrarily decides what should and should not be legal, and seems to believe that if it can be used recreationally but not medically, it should be banned unless it is profitable. It seems silly to me, knowing that things get banned because they are fun, despite their cleaner track record,and because they have no widespread medical purpose and the government lacks an immediate way to cash in.

Obviously, there are drugs that are illegal that are pretty much nothing but poison in even small doses. I don't really think it's wrong to ban certain drugs, but legalizing ALL drugs is preferable to the other option of banning ALL drugs. Of both these radical propositions, I prefer that all drugs be legalized and I am presenting my view accordingly. I think it's only fair to compare THESE two sides due to their radical nature. People here seem to be okay with some drugs and not okay with others, which is middle ground and is what we currently stand on. Obviously some regulation is better than no regulation or complete regulation, but it is the two polar opposites I am addressing, just to make it clear.
5656 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F
Offline
Posted 6/6/13
I guess in the end I can't give people the benefit of the doubt. I have seen too many times when people have had chances to prove they can handle things responsibly but they ended up taking advantage of their privileges. I don't want to be pessimistic or doubt that people can be responsible, but I've come to realize that you can't expect everyone to follow the rules and be respectful. And rather than give them a chance to hurt other people by legalizing all drugs, it's better, in my opinion, to keep those hardcore drugs that end up being abused illegal. I don't want to give people easier access to them knowing that they can now more easily abuse them, whether they're regulated or not. So, what if there is a law saying they can only purchase so much of a certain drug at once? What I see happening is tons of people saving the drug up, either as their personal stash, or to sell it for more than they buy it so they can make money.

And even if there's a law saying that you can't drive while on any of those drugs, that doesn't mean people won't do it. People still drink and drive or text and drive.

27244 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 6/7/13 , edited 6/7/13
But if people will or won't do something based on the choices available to them, regardless of the law, what is the point of the law even being there unless it is actively and consistently enforced? You are correct. People can choose to ignore laws, just as they can choose to ignore their freedoms. The reason, on the surface, of banning drugs it that they are harmful. But we are misinformed about why they might or might not be harmful and the law is heavy-handed when punishing these people who are inherently doing nothing wrong, and the law is encouraged to do so because people are misinformed. What is a 'hardcore' harmful drug? How, precisely, is it harmful and where is the proof? These are questions we must ask ourselves when going down that list of illegal (often shunned) substances and comparing them to legal (often socially accepted) substances and assessing overall risk. In the end, things on these lists may look very similar regardless of their legal status. The fact is that everything is capable of causing harm if abused.

In this case, we choose between two evils: Allowing the government to deceive us and punish us arbitrarily for things not innately 'wrong' OR leaving people to their own devices and hoping they won't abuse harmful drugs. Ban all drugs or legalize all drugs?
18856 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Disboard
Online
Posted 7/11/13
Drugs are peoples way to escape thier problems

Wake up drugs are wrong apart from ones that help
486 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/11/13
In my opinion: It's a bad idea simply because I don't think people would deal with it responsibly (and of course my definition of "responsibly" isn't necessarily the same as someone else's; that's part of the issue). Because there are some drugs that alter one's mental state and create dependency, I'd foresee a major breakdown in society if all drugs were to be legalized. Many people would no longer be of sound mind or make rational decisions. Also, in some cases, their addiction might overcome their morality and crime rates would spike severely. At the present, I'm not able to see how this would change for the better over time.
20156 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Florida, US
Offline
Posted 7/11/13
sounds a bit idealistic...

not sure mental & public health would garner any net benefit
16095 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Lake Elsinore, CA
Offline
Posted 7/12/13
Not a good idea, except for maybe marijuana which I happen to love! ^_^
Of course it is called the gateway drug though, but in my opinion alcohol is biggest killer...
Posted 7/18/13
Yes please
Posted 7/18/13 , edited 7/18/13
I would like it if marijuana, cocaine, opium and shrooms were decriminalized. That would surely take all the crack cocaine, dirty heroin and laced marijuana off the street or at least they would not be sought after as much. The majority of drug addicts are FUNCTIONAL addicts living day by day being productive members of society. Legalizing ALL DRUGS would definately do more good than harm.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.