Harvard Economics Professor Jeffrey Miron says Legalize ALL Drugs

The War on Drugs has proven to be an epic failure yet trillions of taxpayers dollars is pissed away to prohibit drugs

Video:
http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticke...-Says?sec=topStories&pos=9&asset&ccode&ref=nf

Just Say "Yes!" Legalizing Drugs Is Good for Society ... and the Economy, Harvard Prof. Says

Posted Oct 06, 2010 10:06am EDT by Henry Blodget

California residents will vote in November on whether or not to legalize marijuana. If they do vote "yes," says Harvard economics professor Jeffrey Miron, that should only be the beginning.

All drugs should be legalized nationwide, Miron says. Pot, cocaine, LSD, crystal-meth --- you name it.

"Legalizing drugs would save roughly $41.3 billion per year in government expenditure on enforcement of prohibition. Of these savings, $25.7 billion would accrue to state and local governments, while $15.6 billion would accrue to the federal government," Miron claims in a recent Cato Institute report he co-authored.

According to their website, "The report also estimates that drug legalization would yield tax revenue of $46.7 billion annually, assuming legal drugs were taxed at rates comparable to those on alcohol and tobacco. Approximately $8.7 billion of this revenue would result from legalization of marijuana and $38.0 billion from legalization of other drugs."

But won't we become a nation of drug addicts?

No, says Miron. Walk down any city street and you can already buy legal drugs in multiple establishments: Caffeine at Starbucks, nicotine at the supermarket, alcohol at bars and restaurants. And we're not ALL addicted to all of these drugs.

Our current drug policy doesn't work, Miron observes. Despite ~$40 billion spent on enforcement and prosecution, drug use is still widespread. Meanwhile, because the products are illegal, they're dangerous, low-quality, and unregulated, and they generate zero tax revenue.

Legalizing drugs would solve those problems, Miron says. It would help close the budget deficit. And it would eliminate a bizarre double standard, in which Americans are encouraged to drink and smoke themselves to death -- while guzzling addictive coffee and tea -- but become criminals if they dare to get stoned.

By the way, here are 10 ways to invest in the drug-legalization trend >
 

ForumModeregulator

Believer In GregCentauro
An estimated 20% of the US population abuses prescription (legal) drugs, and 65% increase in hospitalizations/overdoses in the past seven years (Scientific American) http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=prescription-drug-deaths...

why add more fuel to the fire by legalizing even MORE dangerous drugs? If we can not even control the drugs we have that are already legal, how do we expect society to realistically handle legalized meth and cocaine?

So many reasons why this is not a good idea...but im just too tired...

Just read this and truly understand that while maybe you are responsible enough, drugs cause problems and ARE not healthy.

http://drugabuse.gov/Infofacts/understand.html


And this is my main point, why the fuck should we be taking advice from an economist when it comes to drugs? I would think doctors are more qualified on the subject at hand. I dont need some guy telling me how to make money, when its clearly presents a problem for the health of society as a whole. It shouldnt be profit over health...
 
An estimated 20% of the US population abuses prescription (legal) drugs, and 65% increase in hospitalizations/overdoses in the past seven years (Scientific American) http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=prescription-drug-deaths...

why add more fuel to the fire by legalizing even MORE dangerous drugs? If we can not even control the drugs we have that are already legal, how do we expect society to realistically handle legalized meth and cocaine?

So many reasons why this is not a good idea...but im just too tired...

Just read this and truly understand that while maybe you are responsible enough, drugs cause problems and ARE not healthy.

http://drugabuse.gov/Infofacts/understand.html


And this is my main point, why the fuck should we be taking advice from an economist when it comes to drugs? I would think doctors are more qualified on the subject at hand. I dont need some guy telling me how to make money, when its clearly presents a problem for the health of society as a whole. It shouldnt be profit over health...

:cool:Where ever there is a thing (anything) there is a human being that will abuse it.

The point you seem to be missing is we shouldn't be criminalizing everyone just to "protect" the weak. Especially when the policy isn't stopping those who want this stuff anyway.

Making the case that people abuse legal drugs to support the case against legalization is circular IMO. It's still illegal to abuse legal drugs...well, illegal to have legal drugs without prescriptions for them. There are people who abuse this shit who don't become addicts as propensity to addiction is allegedly genetic according to the DSM IV.

Everyone knows illegal drugs are dangerous. The people who get hooked on legal drugs do so because there is a perception that they're safe (in spite of addiction warnings), there is a perception that a habit or addiction to them doesn't carry the same stigma as drugs "junkies" are addicted to and the perception is an addiction to legal drugs isn't as debilitating as drugs "junkies" are normally addicted to. Also, addiction to legal drugs is usually accidental. Meaning, the abuser has some condition which causes the abuse of the drug to relieve pain or whatever then they become addicted...not necessarily for the high.

You can't ban people into protecting themselves.
 

ForumModeregulator

Believer In GregCentauro
Your right, but that still doesn't justify making such harmful drugs even more readily available for public consumption does it? That's what I dont get. I understand that drugs are used. I believe that it is very hypocritical to allow the government to tell us what drugs to take and what ones not to (especially since so many "legal" drugs are proven later to be harmful), and I really see how legalizing drugs seems so appealing. Maybe its because I am so pessimistic about human responsibility, maybe its because I have seen so many first hand accounts of drug usage, but in the end I see no benefit from making all these illegal drugs legal.


This is kind of how I feel...

"The rationale is: Law enforcement does not work, and drug treatment should be provided in lieu of jail for drug users.

Why do we buy into the illogical "red-herring rhetoric," pervading the print media today, that declares drug laws and drug law enforcement as the problem? Drug use and its consequences are the problem, not the laws or incarceration.

The vast majority of drug users who are in jail are there for drug-related crimes, such as theft, burglary, forgery, etc. Most are repeat offenders who have previously been offered treatment and probation in lieu of jail and continue to break the law to fund their drug habits.

Drug education, treatment and law enforcement make up the "three-legged stool" that addresses the problem of drug use in America today. These efforts must be mutually supported, not only by the professionals who have expertise in these areas, but also by the media and the public.

The most effective treatment programs we have in this country today are "sanctions based," i.e., go to jail or enter treatment. This concept is integral to Drug Court here in Pima County. Without the threat of sanctions, most hardcore addicts do not seek treatment. This is a fact.

I offer the following on why drug legalization should not be considered:

* Drug use and drug addiction in America will increase substantially. Do we want our commercial pilots, heart surgeons, teachers, police officers and legislators to be incapacitated or impaired while carrying out their job duties? If drugs were legalized, workplace drug use restrictions would become moot.

* What do parents do when their children announce they have made the personal decision to use drugs? Don't think for a minute that the solution here would be a minimum age restriction. The black market would prevail.

* The highway carnage inflicted by drunk drivers will substantially increase by adding drug users into this mix. Additional costs and complications would accrue to our over-burdened criminal justice system.

* Drug treatment and education programs would be well-funded, but oxymoronic, in view of a legalized drug environment with no consequences.

Our public schools will continue to deteriorate, and high-tech companies will not be able to staff their payrolls with qualified workers. Our military strength and international leadership will be drastically weakened, as well.

In an America where drugs are legalized, either the government or private enterprise would supply the drugs - at a dollar cost, of course.

Either would be sued for product liability in a manner similar to the tobacco debacle, and more drug users will commit crimes to get money to buy drugs. Please don't suggest the federal government ( i.e., taxpayers ) provide the drugs free of charge!

There is no "sound bite" solution to the drug problem in this country, nor is there any benefit or logic to demonizing law enforcement.

We can legitimately debate the amount of money and emphasis that should be spent in each of the three disciplines of education, treatment and enforcement, but all three must be mutually supported. We should be open to "alternative" strategies to add to this arsenal, as long as these proposals are designed to reduce drug use in America, not increase it.

In my view, the objective is to give our kids the best possible private or public education we can provide.

They need to see and learn principles of integrity and character, which include being responsible and accountable for their actions. I see no place for legalized drug use in this equation." - William R. Coonce, deputy director of the Arizona High Intensity Drug Trafficking program.

In essence, drug usage and the effects are the true issues. Nothing to do with "the man" telling us what to do, or how to live our lives. Just plain and simple. People need to know drugs are harmful, and how to deal with them.
 

ForumModeregulator

Believer In GregCentauro
Also, addiction to legal drugs is usually accidental. Meaning, the abuser has some condition which causes the abuse of the drug to relieve pain or whatever then they become addicted...not necessarily for the high.

You can't ban people into protecting themselves.

haha, if you read that article from Scientific American there is a part titled "no accident"...

"Poisonings, from prescription drugs and other substances, are classified in medical records as injurious or accidental deaths. But regardless of whether the incidents are listed as unintentional or intentional, they are rarely true mistakes, noted Leonard Paulozzi, a medical epidemiologist with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in congressional testimony in 2007. "Most unintentional drug poisoning deaths are not 'accidents' caused by toddlers or the elderly taking too much medication," he noted. "These deaths are largely due to the misuse and abuse of prescription drugs."

Accidents overall were the fifth most common cause of death in the U.S. as of 2005 (accounting for 117,809 deaths—4.8 percent—that year), according to the National Vital Statistics Report [pdf]. Of injury deaths, poisoning is the second most common cause of death in the U.S., having doubled between 1985 and 2004, according to a 2007 Department of Health and Human Services analysis [pdf]. Among people 35 to 54 years old, poisoning is the most common accidental death—even more so than auto-related deaths.

Many experts think that the sheer prevalence of many of these drugs recently has contributed to the drastic increase in poisonings. Although growing illegal markets and distribution of these drugs might be a driving factor in their increasingly large role in poisonings and deaths, perfectly legal prescriptions are probably playing a role as well, Coben says."
 
Your right, but that still doesn't justify making such harmful drugs even more readily available for public consumption does it? That's what I dont get. I understand that drugs are used. I believe that it is very hypocritical to allow the government to tell us what drugs to take and what ones not to (especially since so many "legal" drugs are proven later to be harmful), and I really see how legalizing drugs seems so appealing. Maybe its because I am so pessimistic about human responsibility, maybe its because I have seen so many first hand accounts of drug usage, but in the end I see no benefit from making all these illegal drugs legal.


This is kind of how I feel...

"The rationale is: Law enforcement does not work, and drug treatment should be provided in lieu of jail for drug users.

Why do we buy into the illogical "red-herring rhetoric," pervading the print media today, that declares drug laws and drug law enforcement as the problem? Drug use and its consequences are the problem, not the laws or incarceration.

The vast majority of drug users who are in jail are there for drug-related crimes, such as theft, burglary, forgery, etc. Most are repeat offenders who have previously been offered treatment and probation in lieu of jail and continue to break the law to fund their drug habits.

Drug education, treatment and law enforcement make up the "three-legged stool" that addresses the problem of drug use in America today. These efforts must be mutually supported, not only by the professionals who have expertise in these areas, but also by the media and the public.

The most effective treatment programs we have in this country today are "sanctions based," i.e., go to jail or enter treatment. This concept is integral to Drug Court here in Pima County. Without the threat of sanctions, most hardcore addicts do not seek treatment. This is a fact.

I offer the following on why drug legalization should not be considered:

* Drug use and drug addiction in America will increase substantially. Do we want our commercial pilots, heart surgeons, teachers, police officers and legislators to be incapacitated or impaired while carrying out their job duties? If drugs were legalized, workplace drug use restrictions would become moot.

* What do parents do when their children announce they have made the personal decision to use drugs? Don't think for a minute that the solution here would be a minimum age restriction. The black market would prevail.

* The highway carnage inflicted by drunk drivers will substantially increase by adding drug users into this mix. Additional costs and complications would accrue to our over-burdened criminal justice system.

* Drug treatment and education programs would be well-funded, but oxymoronic, in view of a legalized drug environment with no consequences.

Our public schools will continue to deteriorate, and high-tech companies will not be able to staff their payrolls with qualified workers. Our military strength and international leadership will be drastically weakened, as well.

In an America where drugs are legalized, either the government or private enterprise would supply the drugs - at a dollar cost, of course.

Either would be sued for product liability in a manner similar to the tobacco debacle, and more drug users will commit crimes to get money to buy drugs. Please don't suggest the federal government ( i.e., taxpayers ) provide the drugs free of charge!

There is no "sound bite" solution to the drug problem in this country, nor is there any benefit or logic to demonizing law enforcement.

We can legitimately debate the amount of money and emphasis that should be spent in each of the three disciplines of education, treatment and enforcement, but all three must be mutually supported. We should be open to "alternative" strategies to add to this arsenal, as long as these proposals are designed to reduce drug use in America, not increase it.

In my view, the objective is to give our kids the best possible private or public education we can provide.

They need to see and learn principles of integrity and character, which include being responsible and accountable for their actions. I see no place for legalized drug use in this equation." - William R. Coonce, deputy director of the Arizona High Intensity Drug Trafficking program.

In essence, drug usage and the effects are the true issues. Nothing to do with "the man" telling us what to do, or how to live our lives. Just plain and simple. People need to know drugs are harmful, and how to deal with them.

:facepalm:I'm not muddling through all that gibberish. I suspect in there are references to the dangers and blah blah blah. That stuff is enlightening to no one. Everyone KNOWS the potential harms.

Besides, you're making cases against arguments that haven't been made. Arguing they should be legal (i.e. just not illegal) isn't a case for making them "available". Who knows...some of the shit might just go or dwindle away without a black market...

haha, if you read that article from Scientific American there is a part titled "no accident"...

"Poisonings, from prescription drugs and other substances, are classified in medical records as injurious or accidental deaths. But regardless of whether the incidents are listed as unintentional or intentional, they are rarely true mistakes, noted Leonard Paulozzi, a medical epidemiologist with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in congressional testimony in 2007. "Most unintentional drug poisoning deaths are not 'accidents' caused by toddlers or the elderly taking too much medication," he noted. "These deaths are largely due to the misuse and abuse of prescription drugs."

Accidents overall were the fifth most common cause of death in the U.S. as of 2005 (accounting for 117,809 deaths—4.8 percent—that year), according to the National Vital Statistics Report [pdf]. Of injury deaths, poisoning is the second most common cause of death in the U.S., having doubled between 1985 and 2004, according to a 2007 Department of Health and Human Services analysis [pdf]. Among people 35 to 54 years old, poisoning is the most common accidental death—even more so than auto-related deaths.

Many experts think that the sheer prevalence of many of these drugs recently has contributed to the drastic increase in poisonings. Although growing illegal markets and distribution of these drugs might be a driving factor in their increasingly large role in poisonings and deaths, perfectly legal prescriptions are probably playing a role as well, Coben says."

Who said anything about accidental deaths and overdoses? I said becoming addicted (to things like painkillers) is mostly accidental. Well, all addictions are likely accidental..I don't think anyone sets out to be an addict.

What I mean is prescription addiction is accidental because most don't take serious the potential for addiction to these things.

Most people understand there is some likelihood of addiction to illicit drugs and that causes people to stay away from them.

No one is going to steer clear of Vicodine if their doctor prescribes it out of fear of addiction.

Again, the case you make here is not really relevant.
 

ForumModeregulator

Believer In GregCentauro
overdoses and addictions are related. If your logic is that addiction is mostly accidental (because nobody sets out to be an addict) than are deaths "accidental" too? Thats my point, if we can not even properly educate or control addictions/overdoes/deaths with "legal" prescription drugs, how are we going to handle the addition of street narcotics?

And I guess most importantly, if my information is too boring for you...How is legalizing drugs beneficial for society, other than the potential profits for the government? Gambling, tobacco, and alcohol, the government is already profiting off of the people's addictions, why add drugs?

How would the integration of these drugs even work? Why pay to go see a doctor and get a prescription for OxyContin, when you can just go to wal-mart and pick up some Heroin?...If these street level drugs are only going to be available on a medical need (which would be ridiculous, there are no medical benefits from most of the illicit narcs) then the black market would still exist. having them readily available would eliminate and/or cause havoc on the system of drugs already in place...So how would it work anyways?
 
overdoses and addictions are related. If your logic is that addiction is mostly accidental (because nobody sets out to be an addict) than are deaths "accidental" too? Thats my point, if we can not even properly educate or control addictions/overdoes/deaths with "legal" prescription drugs, how are we going to handle the addition of street narcotics?
People take both legal and illegal drugs knowingly..but for different reasons. Most people who become addicted to prescription drugs don't take them seeking to get high. Most if not 100 pct. of people who take street drugs take them to get high. What does that distinction mean to you in the context of this discussion?

And proper education doesn't mean you still won't have people who do what they want. There are signs all over our freeways that say 65 mph. Why do people still go 120 on them? Should we ban driving or cars because some can't exercise responsible behavior?
And I guess most importantly, if my information is too boring for you...How is legalizing drugs beneficial for society, other than the potential profits for the government? Gambling, tobacco, and alcohol, the government is already profiting off of the people's addictions, why add drugs?

The A-No.1 benefit to society is we're not criminalizing people for personal choices unless their personal choices directly or proximately cause harm or loss to others.
 

ForumModeregulator

Believer In GregCentauro
People take both legal and illegal drugs knowingly..but for different reasons. Most people who become addicted to prescription drugs don't take them seeking to get high. Most if not 100 pct. of people who take street drugs take them to get high. What does that distinction mean to you in the context of this discussion?

And proper education doesn't mean you still won't have people who do what they want. There are signs all over our freeways that say 65 mph. Why do people still go 120 on them? Should we ban driving or cars because some can't exercise responsible behavior?


The A-No.1 benefit to society is we're not criminalizing people for personal choices unless their personal choices directly or proximately cause harm or loss to others.

You are wrong. Prescription drug abusers ARE trying to get high. Thats why it's abuse...The point I am making is that since it is quite obvious that the legal prescription drugs are a problem already. Doctors are over prescribing, and people are RAMPANTLY abusing prescription drugs to get high, or becoming addicted. That being said, it is very relevant to understanding how the introduction of more dangerous drugs to the legal market would have an impact of the health of society.

As far as the "personal choice" benefit...

People and their rights don’t exist in a vacuum. The notion that drugs only hurt the people who use them is very shallow and illogical. One needs to look beyond themselves and look at the entire picture, and it becomes obvious that drugs have drastic effects on MANY people besides those who use them.

Don't tell me that drugs only hurt the user - Tell that to a crack baby. Tell that to a woman who is raped by her boyfriend while he was high on PCP. Or tell that to the six year old that is raped by that same guy....Tell that to the taxpayers who will be paying out the wazoo for higher insurance rates, more taxes for drug rehabilitation programs, and more money for court cases due to the increased number of drug related offenses.

Please don't tell me that drugs hurt only the person who chooses to use them - that's not true.


READ THIS if you dont believe my rant...

http://www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs11/18862/impact.htm

And again, how could government justify making you get a prescription for certain drugs, while other (more dangerous) drugs are available otc? It just wouldn't work...so making drugs legal, would require a massive overhaul of the current drug system in place...good luck with that...
 
You are wrong. Prescription drug abusers ARE trying to get high. Thats why it's abuse...The point I am making is that since it is quite obvious that the legal prescription drugs are a problem already. Doctors are over prescribing, and people are RAMPANTLY abusing prescription drugs to get high, or becoming addicted. That being said, it is very relevant to understanding how the introduction of more dangerous drugs to the legal market would have an impact of the health of society.
There are those who seek to get high and prescription drugs is just one of many they chose to abuse. That's different. Those are people who are getting high in any event. But the person who becomes addicted from overuse of a prescription isn't looking to abuse the drug and likely has no interest in getting high.

The psychological dependence created from using a drug that stops a pain is a natural thing. Whenever a person can go from one state of being to another by using a pill poses the likelihood of them becoming psychologically dependent on it even if they don't need it.

For example, if you have a cock that works okay most of the time simply because you're out of shape or don't eat right...the last thing you should do is use viagra (or whatever) because you will likely become psychologically dependent on it.
As far as the "personal choice" benefit...

People and their rights don’t exist in a vacuum. The notion that drugs only hurt the people who use them is very shallow and illogical. One needs to look beyond themselves and look at the entire picture, and it becomes obvious that drugs have drastic effects on MANY people besides those who use them.

Don't tell me that drugs only hurt the user - Tell that to a crack baby. Tell that to a woman who is raped by her boyfriend while he was high on PCP. Or tell that to the six year old that is raped by that same guy....Tell that to the taxpayers who will be paying out the wazoo for higher insurance rates, more taxes for drug rehabilitation programs, and more money for court cases due to the increased number of drug related offenses.

Please don't tell me that drugs hurt only the person who chooses to use them - that's not true.


READ THIS if you dont believe my rant...

http://www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs11/18862/impact.htm

And again, how could government justify making you get a prescription for certain drugs, while other (more dangerous) drugs are available otc? It just wouldn't work...so making drugs legal, would require a massive overhaul of the current drug system in place...good luck with that...

We're not going to agree. You're positions are pretty one dimensional and somewhat naive. I imagine you think the same of my arguments.

The instances you cite above are illegal and despicable no matter what causes it. The fact that they occur STILL while we waste billions trying to stop drug abuse is the bigger crime.

We'd be much better off using a fraction of what we're wasting on interdiction on those who want treatment than wasting it trying to keep it out of the hands of those who are determined to get it.

Crack babies and people harmed by drug induced actions don't convince me in the least because those cases are irrelevant to the point.

We don't live in a perfect world...you seem to think legalizing shit that people are already getting at their whim will make the world less perfect. That is utterly one dimensional, short sighted thinking IMO.

You seem to believe most people aren't doing drugs because the law is stopping them. I believe most people aren't doing them because it's not in their interests and whether they're legal or not has little bearing on it.

In spite of alcohol being legal and even marketed there are those who don't abuse it or don't even drink at all. In spite of cigarettes being legal and even marketed there are those who don't smoke them...all this in spite of the fact that many sources cite both alcohol and nicotine as more addictive than some hard core illicit drugs.

Let me ask you...you claimed to have experience with illicit drugs (and I don't doubt this at all:o) assuming you're not addicted, why didn't you become addicted?
 

ForumModeregulator

Believer In GregCentauro
There are those who seek to get high and prescription drugs is just one of many they chose to abuse. That's different. Those are people who are getting high in any event. But the person who becomes addicted from overuse of a prescription isn't looking to abuse the drug and likely has no interest in getting high.

The psychological dependence created from using a drug that stops a pain is a natural thing. Whenever a person can go from one state of being to another by using a pill poses the likelihood of them becoming psychologically dependent on it even if they don't need it.

For example, if you have a cock that works okay most of the time simply because you're out of shape or don't eat right...the last thing you should do is use viagra (or whatever) because you will likely become psychologically dependent on it.


We're not going to agree. You're positions are pretty one dimensional and somewhat naive. I imagine you think the same of my arguments.

The instances you cite above are illegal and despicable no matter what causes it. The fact that they occur STILL while we waste billions trying to stop drug abuse is the bigger crime.

We'd be much better off using a fraction of what we're wasting on interdiction on those who want treatment than wasting it trying to keep it out of the hands of those who are determined to get it.

Crack babies and people harmed by drug induced actions don't convince me in the least because those cases are irrelevant to the point.

We don't live in a perfect world...you seem to think legalizing shit that people are already getting at their whim will make the world less perfect. That is utterly one dimensional, short sighted thinking IMO.

You seem to believe most people aren't doing drugs because the law is stopping them. I believe most people aren't doing them because it's not in their interests and whether they're legal or not has little bearing on it.

In spite of alcohol being legal and even marketed there are those who don't abuse it or don't even drink at all. In spite of cigarettes being legal and even marketed there are those who don't smoke them...all this in spite of the fact that many sources cite both alcohol and nicotine as more addictive than some hard core illicit drugs.

Let me ask you...you claimed to have experience with illicit drugs (and I don't doubt this at all:o) assuming you're not addicted, why didn't you become addicted?

Commonly abused prescription medications are usually Opioids and stimulants, as well as CNS depressants. those medications are certainly used to get high...

Its shortsighted and naive to believe that making street narcotics READILY AVAILABLE AND CHEAP is going to have a beneficial impact on society. Im not saying legalizing drugs is going to make people do drugs. But its going to give them the opportunity to do so. And I am an adult. I know the ramifications and choices that are out there for me. But as a CHILD, how are they going to be impacted in a society where getting high is as easy as running to the local drug store? Thats the population we have to be worried about. You give people too much benefit of the doubt. not everybody out there is as educated or wise as you or I, and therefore are subject to the awful side of drug abuse.

Again get out of the vacuum and step into reality. Drug abuse effects society as a whole, its something that can happen to anybody.
 

Legzman

what the fuck you lookin at?
I've been saying legalize all drugs for years now! Legalize em, regulate em like alcohol and tobacco. Tax em fairly, and reap huge rewards. Then educate children on the effects of said drugs. They gonna try em regardless of if they're legal or not. At least this way people won't get killed in the process of getting the drugs to people.
 
Commonly abused prescription medications are usually Opioids and stimulants, as well as CNS depressants. those medications are certainly used to get high...

Its shortsighted and naive to believe that making street narcotics READILY AVAILABLE AND CHEAP is going to have a beneficial impact on society. Im not saying legalizing drugs is going to make people do drugs. But its going to give them the opportunity to do so. And I am an adult. I know the ramifications and choices that are out there for me. But as a CHILD, how are they going to be impacted in a society where getting high is as easy as running to the local drug store? Thats the population we have to be worried about. You give people too much benefit of the doubt. not everybody out there is as educated or wise as you or I, and therefore are subject to the awful side of drug abuse.

Again get out of the vacuum and step into reality. Drug abuse effects society as a whole, its something that can happen to anybody.

We live in a "free" country. You can be a Bill Gates if you can, you can be a bum if you want. Trying to prevent people from getting things they are bent on getting in order to spare them their own demise is silly IMO and a waste of time.

I don't give nor take credit...I assume we live in an imperfect world where a percentage of people will do dangerous, ill advised things no matter what the law is. Some will cope with it some won't. The main thing is the majority won't no matter what the law is.

I haven't made a single statement where I argued legalization would make drugs "readily available and cheap". You're the only person in any of these threads who keeps inexplicably throwing around the word "available".

In an age where cigarette manufacturers are being sued and having to committed to all sorts of g'ment anal abuse..what reputable manufacturer is going to produce and make "available" drugs that are inherently addictive and unsafe???

You're not living in a real world believing that.

Besides, the point is to stop criminalizing otherwise law-abiding people.
 
I'm all for legalizing pot but I'm against legalizing "all drugs". Pot doesn't lead people to commit moral turpitudes (doesn't lead people to harm each other), but drugs like heroin and crack cocaine do, by, for instance, leading people to rob and burglarize to support their addictions.
 

Jagger69

Three lullabies in an ancient tongue
I've been saying legalize all drugs for years now! Legalize em, regulate em like alcohol and tobacco. Tax em fairly, and reap huge rewards. Then educate children on the effects of said drugs. They gonna try em regardless of if they're legal or not. At least this way people won't get killed in the process of getting the drugs to people.

This subject has been discussed many times on this forum. The reality of the situation is that if a demand for drugs is created, there will be a supply provided whether legal or illegal. This truism has been proven over and over again throughout history through other examples such as gambling, prostitution, etc. The billions of dollars wasted every year on the insipid "war on drugs" is mindless and strictly in place for "show" by reactionary "law and order" politicians who love to brag about their support for law enforcement's efforts to keep drugs off our streets whenever they are running for re-election. It's a total sham. In the meantime, more and more drugs are being brought into the country much to the financial benefit of organized crime and no one else. In fact, there is practically open warfare being waged in Mexico right now over control of the drug trade by such thugs with hundreds of people being gunned down in the process. Legalize them, tax them, regulate them and the whole of society benefits.

I'm all for legalizing pot but I'm against legalizing "all drugs". Pot doesn't lead people to commit moral turpitudes (doesn't lead people to harm each other), but drugs like heroin and crack cocaine do, by, for instance, leading people to rob and burglarize to support their addictions.

Another fallacy. It's the extreme street cost of illegal drugs like heroin that cause addicts to rob and burglarize. Once legalized, just like alcohol, these drugs would be available at more reasonable prices that would preclude the need for such activities in order to support an addiction. You don't normally see alcoholics robbing people just to buy another bottle of wine and you wouldn't see heroin addicts doing it either if they didn't have to.
 
This subject has been discussed many times on this forum. The reality of the situation is that if a demand for drugs is created, there will be a supply provided whether legal or illegal. This truism has been proven over and over again throughout history through other examples such as gambling, prostitution, etc. The billions of dollars wasted every year on the insipid "war on drugs" is mindless and strictly in place for "show" by reactionary "law and order" politicians who love to brag about their support for law enforcement's efforts to keep drugs off our streets whenever they are running for re-election. It's a total sham. In the meantime, more and more drugs are being brought into the country much to the financial benefit of organized crime and no one else. In fact, there is practically open warfare being waged in Mexico right now over control of the drug trade by such thugs with hundreds of people being gunned down in the process. Legalize them, tax them, regulate them and the whole of society benefits.



Another fallacy. It's the extreme street cost of illegal drugs like heroin that cause addicts to rob and burglarize. Once legalized, just like alcohol, these drugs would be available at more reasonable prices that would preclude the need for such activities in order to support an addiction. You don't normally see alcoholics robbing people just to buy another bottle of wine and you wouldn't see heroin addicts doing it either if they didn't have to.

"...and that ball is outta here!!" :clap:
 
This subject has been discussed many times on this forum. The reality of the situation is that if a demand for drugs is created, there will be a supply provided whether legal or illegal. This truism has been proven over and over again throughout history through other examples such as gambling, prostitution, etc. The billions of dollars wasted every year on the insipid "war on drugs" is mindless and strictly in place for "show" by reactionary "law and order" politicians who love to brag about their support for law enforcement's efforts to keep drugs off our streets whenever they are running for re-election. It's a total sham. In the meantime, more and more drugs are being brought into the country much to the financial benefit of organized crime and no one else. In fact, there is practically open warfare being waged in Mexico right now over control of the drug trade by such thugs with hundreds of people being gunned down in the process. Legalize them, tax them, regulate them and the whole of society benefits.

Another fallacy. It's the extreme street cost of illegal drugs like heroin that cause addicts to rob and burglarize. Once legalized, just like alcohol, these drugs would be available at more reasonable prices that would preclude the need for such activities in order to support an addiction. You don't normally see alcoholics robbing people just to buy another bottle of wine and you wouldn't see heroin addicts doing it either if they didn't have to.

:glugglug::glugglug:

Jagger for President. You'd get my vote if I was American. :D
Just don't ban rap music. ;)
 

ForumModeregulator

Believer In GregCentauro
We live in a "free" country. You can be a Bill Gates if you can, you can be a bum if you want. Trying to prevent people from getting things they are bent on getting in order to spare them their own demise is silly IMO and a waste of time.

I don't give nor take credit...I assume we live in an imperfect world where a percentage of people will do dangerous, ill advised things no matter what the law is. Some will cope with it some won't. The main thing is the majority won't no matter what the law is.

I haven't made a single statement where I argued legalization would make drugs "readily available and cheap". You're the only person in any of these threads who keeps inexplicably throwing around the word "available".

In an age where cigarette manufacturers are being sued and having to committed to all sorts of g'ment anal abuse..what reputable manufacturer is going to produce and make "available" drugs that are inherently addictive and unsafe???

You're not living in a real world believing that.

Besides, the point is to stop criminalizing otherwise law-abiding people.

I dont know if you can trust these statistics, but whatever...lax control/legalization correlates to higher rates of drug usage...

http://www.justice.gov/dea/demand/speakout/06so.htm

This subject has been discussed many times on this forum. The reality of the situation is that if a demand for drugs is created, there will be a supply provided whether legal or illegal. This truism has been proven over and over again throughout history through other examples such as gambling, prostitution, etc. The billions of dollars wasted every year on the insipid "war on drugs" is mindless and strictly in place for "show" by reactionary "law and order" politicians who love to brag about their support for law enforcement's efforts to keep drugs off our streets whenever they are running for re-election. It's a total sham. In the meantime, more and more drugs are being brought into the country much to the financial benefit of organized crime and no one else. In fact, there is practically open warfare being waged in Mexico right now over control of the drug trade by such thugs with hundreds of people being gunned down in the process. Legalize them, tax them, regulate them and the whole of society benefits.



Another fallacy. It's the extreme street cost of illegal drugs like heroin that cause addicts to rob and burglarize. Once legalized, just like alcohol, these drugs would be available at more reasonable prices that would preclude the need for such activities in order to support an addiction. You don't normally see alcoholics robbing people just to buy another bottle of wine and you wouldn't see heroin addicts doing it either if they didn't have to.

Look at actual data dealing with REAL criminals (not just ones you hear about on the news). I say this because I live with criminals, I see criminals, and I know what they are like. Again, I dont know if you are going to trust the source...but

Conclusion

The evidence indicates that drug users are more likely than nonusers to commit crimes, that arrestees frequently were under the influence of a drug at the time they committed their offense, and that drugs generate violence. Assessing the nature and extent of the influence of drugs on crime requires that reliable information about the offense and the offender be available and that definitions be consistent. In the face of problematic evidence, it is impossible to say quantitatively how much drugs influence the occurrence of crime."

http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/factsht/crime/index.html

So I guess it's safe to say, that none of us know what the "right" thing to do ...
 
Top