Should All Drugs Be Legalized? Illegalized?
Question by Mr J: Should all Drugs be legalized? illegalized?
I am talking about all drugs. I am sure there are a lot of people who are going to advocate Marijuana legalization on here. Potheads: go chill out and smoke a bowl “maaan”, your not aloud in this conversation.
The truth: Are you high on THC right now? You need to look at both sides of the argument.
There are also many arguments against legalization.
1.
Legalization would increase the number of casual users which, in turn, would increase the number of drug abusers.
2.
More drug users, abusers, and addicts would mean more health problems and lower economic productivity.
3.
Although legalization might result in savings in expensive criminal justice costs and provide tax revenues, increased public-health costs and reduced economic productivity due to more drug-dependent workers would offset the financial benefits of legalization.
4.
The argument based on the analogy between alcohol and tobacco versus psychoactive drugs is weak because its conclusion—psychoactive drugs should be legalized—does not follow from its premises. It is illogical to say that because alcohol and tobacco take a terrible toll (for example, they are
Legalizing all drugs or making all drugs illegal are both not the solution.
But, I knew a pothead would respond by saying all drugs should be legal, just for the sake of his precious weed so he can relax while everything goes to shit.
Best answer:
Answer by This Calls For A Sexy Party
No. High crime rates and drugs tend to go hand in hand.
Add your own answer in the comments!
Tags: drug abuse, crime rates, criminal justice
6 Responses to Should All Drugs Be Legalized? Illegalized?
Leave a Reply
they should all be illegalized.the world will be a better place and less people in hospital.
Based on the form of your question, a resounding NO.
It’s been proven through history that prohibition only worsens a situation. Yes, all drugs should be legalized so the power to control the substance is taken out of criminals hands and back into the governments hands.
When a substance is legalized the underground market that supported it for so long can no longer be profitable.
As far as your comments on “potheads”. You should get a grip on reality and understand that many people who smoke marijuana have a good grasp on this sort of discussion because it’s something we care about.
Marijuana should be the first priority for legalization as it’s a relatively harmless substance that has been demonized.
EDIT – In response:
1. It’s been proven that the war on drugs is ineffective at lowering the amount of drug users. I think we should still discourage our youth from partaking in drugs, but let’s at least tell them the truth about it.
2. Marijuana doesn’t put the user at any immediate or severe health risk. Your claim of lowering economic productivity is completely unfounded and is based off of the idea that legalization of drugs will worsen the people of this nation when it’s just not true. Again, you can throw your little spin on things all you like but it doesn’t run parallel with the reality of the situation.
3. I love how you keep bringing up this “drug dependency” like it actually means anything. Prohibition promotes drug use and gives drugs to the criminals while keeping it out of the control of the government. Just because the cops might bust some drug dealers here and there doesn’t mean the drug is being controlled.
As far as marijuana goes, it’s less addicting than caffeine (which means no drug dependency), and is a useful medicine.
4. The argument makes perfect sense. There are many people who would rather smoke marijuana than drink alcohol, but either way they want to enjoy a recreational substance. So they choose alcohol because they don’t want to risk the legal consequences.
This mean that instead of using a relatively safe substance, they are causing more harm to themselves and society. We should allow people to make the safer choice for a recreational substance. It’s complete mixed signals. Instead of using the safer drug that doesn’t have the potential for making a person violent, we just advertise alcohol, a completely destructive and addictive drug.
You just need to get over yourself. You also need to get over the perception that all marijuana users are “pothead” losers.
My wife and I smoke nearly everyday, we pay our taxes, we both own our businesses and lead what anyone would or could call a “normal” life. How that makes me some pothead loser I’ll never know.
Also, my wifes aunt lives in pain every single day. Pharmaceuticals (much more dangerous drugs than marijuana) made her pain worse and severely destroyed her body. Now she can hardly walk and the only substance she has found to take her pain away is marijuana. You can call her a pothead all you want too, I suppose. But you’ll never understand what a saving grace it has been for her. It’s judgmental people like you that this world can do without.
You should also look into LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition). Law enforcement officers see first hand just how ineffective prohibition is.
http://www.leap.cc/cms/index.php
You may also want to watch a documentary called “American Drug War: The Last White Hope”.
….That is, if you truly want to learn about anything regarding prohibition. It sounds to me you are more into trying to tear other people down to make you feel better about yourself.
Prohibition didn’t work for alcohol so it was legalized because it proved that prohibition does more harm than good.
How you can argue that marijuana (or any other drug) is any different is beyond me.
All drugs should be illegal in the United States and around the globe. This is insane!!!!! We don’t need felons/people getting high off of drugs and possibly,suffer the consequences of death. It is too many special treatments out there trying to heal people up. Scientists need to find another alternative for MariJauna. Resend me a message at my email,.Thank you.
All drugs are different so you shouldn’t have to legalise or illegalise all of them. If you take each drug seperately you can see that some actually wouldn’t cause harm to society.
For example Ecstacy. It sounds scary but it makes people happy, peacefull, friends and as far as science can tell doesn’t harm you. Compare that to alcohol. It makes people do stupid things and ruins millions of lives.
The drug problem
Drugs have been the focal point of the crime problem in the U.S. for years and have contributed to violence and the soaring prison population
Hysteria over Drugs
Public hysteria over drugs as evidenced by Reefer Madness in the 1930s and the crack baby scare in the 1980s prevent sensible discussion of policy. The truth about the drug problem is different than what is portrayed and myths inhibit the development of sound and effective policies
The Drug-Crime Connection
Many people believe drugs cause crime and a myth persists of the “drug-crazed criminal.” The complex relationship between drugs and crime includes drug-defined crimes, drug-related crimes and crimes associated with drug usage. A large percentage of arrestees are involved with both drug and alcohol use but this does not mean the crime was caused by drugs. The national drug control strategy regards many substances as gateways to more serious drugs, but evidence does not support this view. There is evidence that illegal drug use does not lead to criminal activity. The implication is that even if we succeed in substantially reducing illegal drug use we would not necessarily reduce crime to the same degree
The Drug Policy Choices
Drug policy advocates can be classified as hawks who emphasize law enforcement to eradicate drug abuse, owls prefer prevention and treatment and doves believe we should define drug abuse as a public health problem. A radical dove approach is to legalize drugs but a more moderate approach is harm reduction. The drug policy debate involves a disagreement over whether drugs or drug policy cause the greatest harm; the hawk/owl/dove categories do not match up with the conservative/liberal dichotomy
Hawk type policies have dominated American drug policy and have become increasingly hawkish as wars on drugs have been declared and prisons filled. The Office of National Drug Control Policy includes a mix of education, treatment and law enforcement.
The Impact of the War on Drugs
Arrests for drug offenses tripled between 1975 and 2003 and this has been the primary factor in the spectacular increase in the prison population. Racial minorities are the primary victims of the war on drugs. Racial bias is blatant at street level enforcement that focuses on minority neighborhoods and harsh federal sentencing guidelines for crack. As arrests and imprisonment have become common, the deterrent effect has been lost and racial disparities undermine the legitimacy of the system
Police Crackdowns
A principle police strategy for reducing drug abuse is aggressive law enforcement including crackdowns that are intensive and focused. An evaluation of one crackdown, Operation Pressure Point (OPP), revealed some short-term benefits, but at the expense of other negative effects. A serious criticism of OPP is that the drug problem in New York city worsened after the program as arrested offenders were replaced. The University of Maryland reports crackdowns show no consistent reductions in violent crime and law enforcement agree they have little impact on the availability of drugs. Programs that work include problem-oriented policing strategies that involve more than law enforcement acting in combination.
Tougher Sentencing
Incapacitation and deterrence are tough sentencing strategies but they are ineffective in reducing crime because of replacement and lack of opportunity. Tougher sentences do not work because drug use and crime is highest among the lower class who are targets of deterrence and incapacitation
Limits of the criminal law: the lessons of history
Prohibition: Alcohol prohibition likely improved health, but created even more substantial problems like corruption and did not end all drinking
Social Gambling: Though gambling was heavily restricted until recently millions of Americans engaged in it and it had the same collateral effects as prohibition
Gun Control: Gun control laws have not made obtaining weapons difficult
The Old Criminal Abortion Laws: Before Roe v. Wade illegal abortions were performed that resulted in death and permanent injury to women
Sodomy, Fornication, Adultery, and Prostitution Laws: Outlawing various forms of sexual activity never stopped people from engaging in it
Overall, When trying to control products or services people want, someone will try to supply it, suppression will lead to evasion and criminal syndicates, enforcement will cause secondary crime and encourage adaptations
There are different advocates that want reform to the justice system regarding drugs… personally I’m a agnostic, we need reform but not yet sure how to go about doing it because of it complexity.
Maximalists: A version of legalization that advocates legalization of the sale and possession of all drugs for juveniles and adults
Moderates: A version of legalization that advocates the removal of criminal penalties for the possession of many drugs and the sale of some drugs for adults only
Minimalists: A version of legalization that advocates the elimination of penalties only for adult possession of marijuana
Agnostics: A version of legalization where a final position has not been taken but people are convinced the current policy is failed and we need a national debate on a new approach to drugs