In the UK I think something like 70% of adults want weed legalised. Although it goes to show just how poor a democracy we live in when the vast majority support something and it doesn't happen, most people who support weed legalisation should really take it one step further and apply it to all drugs. There are a whole bunch of reasons for this which I will now list:
1)Regulation. Illegal drugs are cut with all kinds of shit. Legalised drugs would be regulated and so wouldn't be full of crap. This makes them much, much safer for use. The impurities in drugs are harmful and cause (extra) damage. Varying levels of concentration are also to blame for lots of OD's. 2)Tax. Speaks for itself. Alcohol and tobacco more than make up in tax revenue what they cost the NHS. Something like ?2 billion a year in cost, ?6 billion a year in tax revenue. There is no reason why illegal drugs would be different. 3)Saves money. The War on Drugs is astronomically expensive and the police can focus time, money and effort on catching real criminals rather than pursuing addicts. 4)There is no reason to believe it will increase the number of users. In the UK when weed was re-classified to C instead of B, the number of users fell from 11% to 8%. In Holland, weed usage fell after its decriminalisation. In Geneva a test program where heroin users were given safe drugs and a place to do it in caused the number of new users to fall by 80%. If you ask someone why they don't do crack it's usually because they don't want to be a crackhead, not because the police might lock them up. 5)Lowers crime. I don't just mean drug possession/dealing. Drug dealing gangs are responsible for huge amounts of crime. Cutting out a major source of their income will cut crime. 6)Drug barons go bust/legit. Drug barons aren't nice people. This would put the money into the hands of CEO's instead. Not a huge improvement I must say but most CEO's aren't quite as bad as drug barons. Either that or drug barons will go legit. Not an ideal solution but still cuts crime. 7)Free up prison space. The UK prison system is dangerously overcrowded and the less said about the size of the US prison system the better. Suffice to say that there will be far more room in prisons when we stop locking people up for having an addiction. 8)Hypocrisy. There is no reason why tobacco and alcohol should be legal and acceptable and other drugs shouldn't be. Far more people are killed by those two. Far more violence is caused by alcohol. Etc etc. It doesn't make sense and tradition is not a reason for anything. 9)Cheaper. If drugs are legal then they'd be cheaper (even when taxed). This would mean that drug addicts wouldn't have to steal (or would have to steal less) to obtain drugs. Lots of crime is caused by this and getting rid of it sounds good. 10)People will be less afraid of getting help for their addictions and will make it easier for people to get into rehab or whatever. As it stands, it's kind of awkward given the illegal status of drugs. It's easier to quit tobacco and alcohol because you can get lots of help from the NHS and lots of other charities. Illegal drugs don't have this. 11)Freedom. Even without the other 10 reasons (which IMO are more than enough to warrant legalisation) I would still advocate legalisation for the very simple reason that it is the not the government's place to tell me what I can do to myself for my own enjoyment. I can slice a razorblade across my arm, why I can't I stick a syringe full of heroin in? It seems ridiculous that there are actually chemicals which are banned. A somewhat backwards view for the 21st century.
There might be a couple of other reasons I've left out/forgotten, I'll stick them on if I remember. Sorry it's a bit late JD, I was savagely ill yesterday and couldn't put it up.
I've been saying this for years about drugs in the States...my wife and most everyone else thinks I'm crazy. Vote Libertarian is all I've got to say...
Well said. I think the US is bitchy about legalising a drug, even weed,because that will mean they'll have to admit that banning it was wrong, stupid and their mistake. The longer it takes, the harder it will get IMO.
Anyways, I agree with the whole list so well done. And thanks, I guess :P
I definitely agree with legalizing marijuana. Not sure where I stand on the other drugs, but it's kinda hard to argue with the "I should be able to do whatever I want to myself" philosophy.
In Geneva a test program where heroin users were given safe drugs and a place to do it in caused the number of new users to fall by 80%.
Nah, if u legalise marijuana theres no fun in taking it anymore-i dont agree drugs should be legalised and im not a huge fan of them myself-but it wouldnt really affect me if they did
Nah, if u legalise marijuana theres no fun in taking it anymore
Exactly, reasons like this are why new user rates fall. Imagine how many underage drinkers we'd have if there was no age limit on alcohol :
Very well written Jack, although I'm not too sure on the last point of "I can do what I want, it's my body" as a justification, but that's just my own over-concern for other peoples' safety.
Drugs are so expensive because it is pretty damn hard to smuggle them into the country so anything which is difficult instantly means the price of will rise. It's also costly to get them into the country because you need to pay for someone to come in carrying them or to have them shipped in hidden in something else. Thirdly, and probably the one which raises the price the most, the risk involved is pretty large. Smuggling in class A drugs will get you a massive fine with an equally massive prison sentence. It's a risky business and so people demand a lot of money for it.
Even with tax, legal drugs will be cheaper because those issues will go away (or be a lot cheaper). Drugs can be shipped in properly which will be cheaper and in larger quantities which is cheaper. You don't go to prison for it so people just need a living wage rather than a living wage plus risk money.
And the age limit will be 18. For everything. Alcohol, cigarettes, crack, weed etc. Although I'm still in two minds as to whether there should be an age limit at all...
No, Having an age limit creates two groups of people, people that are allowed to do it, and other people who can only do it in hiding, and unsupervised situations. If you're going to make the argument that people under 21 are too immature to make their own decisions about drugs, then you must also agree that it's much better to have immature people doing things in places where it can be monitored, and where they can be part of the legal culture, to learn how every other "mature" person does it.
On an economics point of view saturating the market with legalized drugs would drive prices down bringing an end to the crimes associated with it due to economic factors. However meths you fail to realize the important aspect of ethics. Will it be ethical? Also externalities play an important role in such a suggestion.
I assume you know externalities so I won't bother discussing it with you. To give you an analogy, there are two persons who have business enterprises and both are situated in a river. One is a fishing enterprise while the other runs a factory that pollutes a river. The one who has a fishing enterprise is obviously hurt and requires government intervention.
The government proposes two things:
a) Tax the polluter
b) provide subsidies to the polluter to lessen his production (hence lessen his pollution)
A clear picture emerges in connection with legalizing drugs, first if the government subsidizes the factory it would lesson the pollution in THE SHORT RUN. However given the fact that there is subsidization, more factories will be placed near the river in the hopes of getting the subsidy that pollution actually increases.
Different situations, same result. By legalizing drugs, it would lessen the cost and the crime due to economic factors would certainly lessen-albeit in the short run. However by the time people find it cheap to do these harmful substances you'll realize often that crimes will actually increase and morality decays. These drugs have been found to decrease brain performance and even cause certain cancers. Society will find itself being run with sick rats and brain dead fools. Certainly not the type of society anyone would want. And again there is always an ethical issue, legalizing drugs would create irresponsibility to anyone who uses it.
Although I disagree, that was rather written nicely
1)It is more unethical to deny someone their rights then it is to give them the right to harmself. Do you also intend to criminalise self-harm? I reserve the right to control my body and what goes into it. To deny me control of myself is far more unjust.
2)I do not have a large amount of respect for people and even I realise that legalising drugs will not make people do it.
3)I have not "ignored" ethics. The positives of drug legalisation far outweigh any possible negatives meaning that drug criminalisation is the IMMORAL stance on the grounds that it increases harm to both the user and society. And even if the positives did not outweigh the negatives, it would be more unethical to remove our freedom.
4)Doing drugs is not immoral.
Before I read this article, I was against the legalization of all drugs and even marijuana. After reading this, I was unsure, and after giving it some thought, I now agree completely with the blog.
"If you ask someone why they don't do crack it's usually because they don't want to be a crackhead, not because the police might lock them up."
I also couldn't agree more with that statement. People assume that with the legalisation of all drugs, society will go crazy, but I think that most people are smart enough not to do the kinds of drugs that cause extreme damage to the brain (like crack).
The "War on Drugs" is a "cash cow" industry for government. By re-legalizing all drugs, you would be taking away an enormous amount of surplus "taxes" from the government. Thus leaving them (the government), with one less way to "line their pockets" with gold.
And to give up that "Golden Calf", would prove to be a very hard pill (for them) to swallow.
I agree to the legalisation of soft drugs, as in anything less harmfull than alcohol/tabacco. This includes lsd, ectasy, weed, some *weak* amphetamines (meth is dangerous kids, take ritalin instead), mescaline and Psilocybin mushrooms and possibly cocaine.
Especially ectasy and lsd and amphetamines. Pharmaceutical versions of these drugs are pretty safe in comparison to alcohol. But when drug barons start cutting them and amateurs start pressing these pills, people OD really easily and the additives can become deadly toxins. Not cool.
Yes, I know some people can and have used dangerous drugs responsibly (heroin, crack, meth and so on), but the reality is most people who use these drugs don't and get messed up. The addictiveness of these drugs won't change if they're legalised.
I don't agree with statements like "it takes the fun out of it." That is definitely the case for underage weed users, but it's not the same for most of us. You think older stoners smoke to look cool?
I also don't agree with the statement "the American goverment won't legalise weed because it would mean proving themselves wrong." Weed was criminalised back in the 30's, mostly because "dangerous" underclassed people were using it (AKA, mexicans and asiatic indians). Alcohol was also criminalised back in the 30's because other dangerous people (AKA, the irish, italians, spanish), but was quickly legalised again. You know why? Because everyone in senate was a drunken alcoholic. If your theory was true, senate wouldn't legalise it so quickly.
So what we need to do is quietly promote weed use (not as deviant as it sounds) and wait untill the 80's generation (possibly 70's) is old and grey and everyone in parliament has used weed at some stage.
from personal experience, i don't think all drugs should be legal. pot, hell ya because it shouldn't even be classified as a drug. alot of people act different ways when using, say, a psychadelic. some people can handle it, some people wig out.
Im going to assume that you're using these substances while they are illegal? Because nobody who didn't do drugs would try to make ALL drugs legal. I can understand marijuana, but ALL drugs is something that no ordinary person would do unless they actually used the illegal substance already. Also, no ordinary person would support the legalization of ALL drugs unless they used them, such as cocaine, diacetylmorphine, and methamphetamines.
Keep in mind here, I'm not disagreeing with any of the points you have made.
Well, I can see legalizing. And I agree that there would hardly be any addicts. Yet there are certain drugs that no one should have in their possession or should be available. Sort of ironic with your username, but meth is an awful drug, and I think that legalizing meth could stop other people from doing it, but that's a dark and fucked up road to travel down. It would be a game of chance. Meth labs have a tendency to explode, and meth fucks you up, no matter what.
Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about. Good read though, kudos to you.
kingofdudes161 wrote on Dec 26th, 2008 at 12:41am :
Im going to assume that you're using these substances while they are illegal? Because nobody who didn't do drugs would try to make ALL drugs legal. I can understand marijuana, but ALL drugs is something that no ordinary person would do unless they actually used the illegal substance already. Also, no ordinary person would support the legalization of ALL drugs unless they used them, such as cocaine, diacetylmorphine, and methamphetamines.
Keep in mind here, I'm not disagreeing with any of the points you have made.
When I originally wrote this and started promoting the idea, I'm pretty sure the only illegal drug I'd done was weed. I've since done other drugs but yeah, I did suggest this even though I didn't do the drugs.
There are a lot of other things people have said but they're all addressed in the actual blog. Don't bother to comment if you're going to reiterate arguments I've already shot down.
Dude, I'm on board with the whole marajuana legalization. It can serve many purposes to the medical field as well as recreational and academic use.
1. There was a test done in the US about the effects of marajuana and how it changes the concentration of the human mind. The results were that the ones who toked up on Mary Jane did better than those who didn't. The reason being is that when you are high on weed, your mind is more relaxed and in a subconcious state of mind. This allows you to take in more information and be able to recall it.
2. It serves as a wonderful anesthetic in hospitals as well as something to anyone who has trouble eating. It is also proven to help reduce stress levels significantly if you smoke it on an "every two weeks" basis.
The only downfall is that if you smoke weed on a daily basis for at least 2 years, there will be a decrease in your sperm count.
Nice one meths.
Could you elaborate why it would be cheaper, it's not that i don't believe you, i just have a friend who thinks weed is better off illegal because it would be expensive when taxed (although he gets his ciggies tax free off the back of a lorry) i want good solid evidence to prove him wrong.
I drink to that! Really, great blog, I've used only a few of your arguments but you're completely right in all of them. And the only drug I've ever used is pot, but I fully support legalizing all drugs.
Ha, I have this copied and pasted from when you posted it in an argument in the pit. You said feel free to plagerise this, or something along those lines, and I just had to, its such a flawless argument. Anyway, you missed out number 12;
12)Prevents Colombia, Mexico and Afghanistan becoming failed states. Colombia is run by gangsters and Northern Mexico's heading that way. The US response is, naturally, to ramp up "The War On Drugs" and throw more money at the problem. Legitimise the drug trade and protect the people of Colombia and Mexico from drug runners.
In Afghanistan it's slightly different and possibly more urgent to legitimise the drug trade. 90% of the world's opium/heroin comes from Afghanistan and most of the money made from it funds the Taleban. A proper heroin trade would remove the Taleban's main source of income. It's hard to wage war and oppress people when you've got no weapons. Want to help the War on Terror? End the War on Drugs.
| My Profile
Legalise all drugs blog
:
