Legalize drugs: Yes or no?
What are your views on legalizing drugs?
1
What are your opinions on the legalization of all drugs: Harmless and dangerous alike? Many people support legalizing marijuana, but the issue is much more divided when it comes to drugs like cocaine, heroin, and meth.
Me, I'm under the belief that everyone has the right to put whatever they want into their own bodies, as long as they do not infringe on the rights of others. Based on this alone, alcohol and tobacco rank at the tip of the top in terms of danger for the user and innocent bystanders...
But both can be used in a responsible way that doesn't effect others. They're legal. Why not others?
I'm also talking about steroids, sleep aids, and painkillers. All controlled drugs.
What are your views on the subject?
Me, I'm under the belief that everyone has the right to put whatever they want into their own bodies, as long as they do not infringe on the rights of others. Based on this alone, alcohol and tobacco rank at the tip of the top in terms of danger for the user and innocent bystanders...
But both can be used in a responsible way that doesn't effect others. They're legal. Why not others?
I'm also talking about steroids, sleep aids, and painkillers. All controlled drugs.
What are your views on the subject?
0
I voted to not legalize, but to reform our current laws. I only voted for this option because in my opinion those words are flexible.
In my opinion there is too much grey space in this topic. If you legalize marijuana, where is it legal? Who says it is legal? Do the states get to decide whether they legalize it or not? Is it a national law? Where the congressmen and the president get to decide? Now onto the "private use" idea, if it is legal for private use what defines private use? You create it and you can use it? You make it and some of your friends use it? You bought it from somebody and now its all yours do whatever with it?
If drugs are legalized who will be in charge of distributing them? The government? Private owners? Corporations? Street vendors? Will they be taxed? Will they be monitored?
In my opinion there is too much grey space in this topic. If you legalize marijuana, where is it legal? Who says it is legal? Do the states get to decide whether they legalize it or not? Is it a national law? Where the congressmen and the president get to decide? Now onto the "private use" idea, if it is legal for private use what defines private use? You create it and you can use it? You make it and some of your friends use it? You bought it from somebody and now its all yours do whatever with it?
If drugs are legalized who will be in charge of distributing them? The government? Private owners? Corporations? Street vendors? Will they be taxed? Will they be monitored?
0
animefreak_usa
Child of Samael
People have the right to fuck there life's up... marriage is still legal.
0
I voted to legalize all. The purpose of law should be to protect people from the stupidity of others, not the stupidity of themselves. Oh and this.
0
The reason that most 'drugs' are 'illegal' (controlled is a more apt description) is because of their potential for abuse, dependence, and overdose. And for the most part, rightly so.
First, in the early 1900s, came their being enforced standards on strength, purity and quality of drugs. That means when you take 200 mg of tylenol, you get the amount you need. Again, they added things like requiring labels on drugs. It's nice to know if you're allergic, no? I believe that these things she most definitely remain in effect for the good of all.
Then came the 1970s when such drugs were being widely abused, and so the DEA was born. Drugs were categorized based on their 1)medical value 2)harmfulnes 3)potential for abuse and addiction.
Do all drugs in their classification belong their? Moreover, should they continue to be controlled as they are? I'm inclined to say "yes" to the majority of them, though some things like marijuana I'd say should be "legal". Keeping in mind that alcohol was at one time illegal, and now today is responsible for ~60% traffic accidents and 1/3 of all traffic fatalities, and tobacco is responsible for multiple cancers, emphysema, and heart disease, why not make marijuana legal?
Does that infringe on an individual's rights? Mm... I'd be inclined to say that it does, to an extent. However, I'm more inclined to believe that, were these options "legal", far more instances of individual rights would be trampled upon by those very people whose rights are "infringed" by being unable to "do drugs". I've close friends who themselves are addicts, to one vice or another, and have seen the trouble it causes them in their daily lives. Children go hungry, violence ensues and people are injured, and lives are ruined. Should these other drugs be made legal? Hell no, because by doing so, an individual's choice bleeds into the lives of everyone around them.
First, in the early 1900s, came their being enforced standards on strength, purity and quality of drugs. That means when you take 200 mg of tylenol, you get the amount you need. Again, they added things like requiring labels on drugs. It's nice to know if you're allergic, no? I believe that these things she most definitely remain in effect for the good of all.
Then came the 1970s when such drugs were being widely abused, and so the DEA was born. Drugs were categorized based on their 1)medical value 2)harmfulnes 3)potential for abuse and addiction.
Do all drugs in their classification belong their? Moreover, should they continue to be controlled as they are? I'm inclined to say "yes" to the majority of them, though some things like marijuana I'd say should be "legal". Keeping in mind that alcohol was at one time illegal, and now today is responsible for ~60% traffic accidents and 1/3 of all traffic fatalities, and tobacco is responsible for multiple cancers, emphysema, and heart disease, why not make marijuana legal?
Does that infringe on an individual's rights? Mm... I'd be inclined to say that it does, to an extent. However, I'm more inclined to believe that, were these options "legal", far more instances of individual rights would be trampled upon by those very people whose rights are "infringed" by being unable to "do drugs". I've close friends who themselves are addicts, to one vice or another, and have seen the trouble it causes them in their daily lives. Children go hungry, violence ensues and people are injured, and lives are ruined. Should these other drugs be made legal? Hell no, because by doing so, an individual's choice bleeds into the lives of everyone around them.
0
mynameis832 wrote...
What are your opinions on the legalization of all drugs: Harmless and dangerous alike? Many people support legalizing marijuana, but the issue is much more divided when it comes to drugs like cocaine, heroin, and meth.Me, I'm under the belief that everyone has the right to put whatever they want into their own bodies, as long as they do not infringe on the rights of others. Based on this alone, alcohol and tobacco rank at the tip of the top in terms of danger for the user and innocent bystanders...
But both can be used in a responsible way that doesn't effect others. They're legal. Why not others?
I'm also talking about steroids, sleep aids, and painkillers. All controlled drugs.
What are your views on the subject?
Is there any good reason why cocaine, heroin, and meth should be legalized?
Also, marijuana users don't typically infringe upon the rights of others because those others would obviously report the users for their potential offenses. Thus, smoking of marijuana is not done in places where this could happen, at least not where I live. If it were legalized, people could start smoking it in public without fear of being reported, which could have the potential to create a batch of right-infringing hyper retards running around in broad daylight.
I'd like to hear a counterpoint.
0
Is there any good reason why cocaine, heroin, and meth should be legalized?
Not really but if alcohol and tobacco are legal, they might as well be too. There isn't really any medical use for alcohol or tobacco and they have a high potential for addiction and abuse. The only differences between them all is really how quickly you become addicted and how easy it is to overdose.
Also, marijuana users don't typically infringe upon the rights of others because those others would obviously report the users for their potential offenses. Thus, smoking of marijuana is not done in places where this could happen, at least not where I live. If it were legalized, people could start smoking it in public without fear of being reported, which could have the potential to create a batch of right-infringing hyper retards running around in broad daylight.
I'd like to hear a counterpoint.
I'd like to hear a counterpoint.
Marijuana is probably the least of our worries when it comes to altering someones behavior to a state that would infringe upon the rights of others. In fact I'd bet that stress is probably the worst in making people behave like that. And you know what helps with stress? :P
Even still, if it were legalized it would still need to be regulated. Obviously no driving while under the influence. It would probably face similar regulation to tobacco in the regard of smoking.
Also, I don't know if you are just unaware or in denial but there already are plenty of people that go out in public high. It is much easier to hide being high than it is to hide being drunk. You play the "I'm sick" or "I'm tired" or "It's just allergies" card and throw on some cologne and you can easily fool people. I'm pretty sure people wouldn't just become complete idiots if it were legalized. It's not like they would think that just because it is legal that they don't have to take responsibility for their actions. Lets also not forget how you can't really tell if someone is high like you can tell if someone is drunk. There is no breathalyzer for weed and thc can stay in your system well after its effects ware off.
And it's not like there aren't already hyper retards running around. The only difference you would likely notice if weed were legalized is an increase in areas where you smell it and an increase of seeing people actually smoking it. In my opinion the biggest prevention of idiotic behavior of stoners in public would be the paranoia they would likely get.
0
I think pot has some good medical applications and I know it's not nearly as bad as some people make it out to be, but I still think keeping it illegal is a good move. Anything else? Forget it. I grew up with a junkie father, and no amount of revenue is worth people like that walking around.
I don't really have a problem with smoking or drinking as long as it's kept in private and away from kids.
I don't really have a problem with smoking or drinking as long as it's kept in private and away from kids.
0
Jash2o2 wrote...
Not really but if alcohol and tobacco are legal, they might as well be too. There isn't really any medical use for alcohol or tobacco and they have a high potential for addiction and abuse. The only differences between them all is really how quickly you become addicted and how easy it is to overdose.
People often use the legality of alcohol and tobacco to defend other drugs; this is an outright misuse of logic. Those two drugs aren't legal because the government said they were good, they are legal because it's too hard to enforce a ban on them (such as alcohol prohibition). They are too embedded into society and too many people are already using them while other drugs don't have these qualities. It is a misuse of logic because the reason they are legal isn't a reason for the other drugs to be legal, ergo they should not be treated as equal.
Drugs that can be abused will be abused and always have negative consequences for those who don't use them. Malformed children are born everyday because mothers drink while pregnant, people die from drunk driving, abusive alcoholic parents, second hand smoking, etc. There is no doubt that negative consequences won't happen because those who tend to use drugs are often irresponsible. If they weren't we wouldn't have the problems we have now. It's not about caring for an individual's self destruction, it's about the people that that individual affects.
0
Spoiler:
You still offer a good reason why those other drugs should still be banned. How quickly you become addicted and how easy it is to overdose are excellent reasons to ban them lol.
But yeah, you do present a good argument for legalizing marijuana. I'm not actually that against it, I was only being the devil's advocate here. XD At this point, the government might as well giving legalizing a chance as there seems to be a large call for it. Good luck getting it past Congress though. X.x
0
I think the law is inconsistent; alcohol and tobacco are legal, but marijuana and the others aren't. Either all of them should be legal, or none of them should be legal. Legalizing all of these drugs will not infringe the rights of others, however, there is a negative effects to doing so...
If all drugs were legalized, they would be dangerously easy to obtain. Every party and club will have these highly addictive drugs readily available. No matter how much you tell a teen "don't do drugs", most teens are unable to resist the peer pressure to try a drug. Due to peer pressure, and the idea that "it's cool, everyone does it", the amount of drug usage will be far greater than if drugs were illegal.
I actually thought of the perfect solution to drugs:
legalize the right to buy, own, and use drugs, but make it illegal to re-distribute drugs in any way.
In other words, a legal store (One that's registered to pay taxes) can sell drugs, and anyone with ID (to prove he's over 18) can buy drugs from said store. It would be illegal for him to give or sell these drugs to friends, and it would be illegal to give or sell these drugs at parties or clubs; the drugs would only be for personal use.
If all drugs were legalized, they would be dangerously easy to obtain. Every party and club will have these highly addictive drugs readily available. No matter how much you tell a teen "don't do drugs", most teens are unable to resist the peer pressure to try a drug. Due to peer pressure, and the idea that "it's cool, everyone does it", the amount of drug usage will be far greater than if drugs were illegal.
I actually thought of the perfect solution to drugs:
legalize the right to buy, own, and use drugs, but make it illegal to re-distribute drugs in any way.
In other words, a legal store (One that's registered to pay taxes) can sell drugs, and anyone with ID (to prove he's over 18) can buy drugs from said store. It would be illegal for him to give or sell these drugs to friends, and it would be illegal to give or sell these drugs at parties or clubs; the drugs would only be for personal use.
0
People often use the legality of alcohol and tobacco to defend other drugs; this is an outright misuse of logic. Those two drugs aren't legal because the government said they were good, they are legal because it's too hard to enforce a ban on them (such as alcohol prohibition). They are too embedded into society and too many people are already using them while other drugs don't have these qualities. It is a misuse of logic because the reason they are legal isn't a reason for the other drugs to be legal, ergo they should not be treated as equal.
That may be but it just seems like such a cop out. The government has given many baseless reasons for keeping things illegal, such as marijuana, but their only reason for keeping things worse than marijuana legal is because of how engrained in society they are. I find it all so foolish. Sure it is hard to prohibit alcohol but is it not just a matter of time before it becomes just as hard to prohibit anything else? It's already easier to get any hard drug than it is to get alcohol or tobacco.
It seems to me like an extremely dangerous substance can be legal only if it has at least ONE practical purpose or it is embedded into society. I mean how many household chemicals are outright deadly if ingested but since they can clean stuff, they remain legal. Makes me wonder that if heroin could be used to clean your toilet if it would be legal.
Drugs that can be abused will be abused and always have negative consequences for those who don't use them. Malformed children are born everyday because mothers drink while pregnant, people die from drunk driving, abusive alcoholic parents, second hand smoking, etc. There is no doubt that negative consequences won't happen because those who tend to use drugs are often irresponsible. If they weren't we wouldn't have the problems we have now. It's not about caring for an individual's self destruction, it's about the people that that individual affects.
But this all comes down to personal responsibility. A person that is irresponsible and causes a negative outcome due to that irresponsibly should be punished. The person that uses a drug should know that they still hold responsibility for their actions and they should not be relieved of responsibility because their mind was altered by a drug they chose to use. It's a lot like the argument for guns. You still blame the person when they use a gun to hurt someone else, even if it's an accident.
0
Jash2o2 wrote...
That may be but it just seems like such a cop out. The government has given many baseless reasons for keeping things illegal, such as marijuana, but their only reason for keeping things worse than marijuana legal is because of how engrained in society they are. I find it all so foolish. Sure it is hard to prohibit alcohol but is it not just a matter of time before it becomes just as hard to prohibit anything else? It's already easier to get any hard drug than it is to get alcohol or tobacco.
Now you're just putting in personal opinion and misusing the same logic for legalizing marijuana vs alcohol. You also don't use any statistics that suggest marijuana use is becoming too prevalent to control. You are using the slippery slope fallacy in which one thing must lead to another. In this case, legal drugs should lead to illegal drugs becoming legal but you provide no evidence that this should be true and use personal opinion as argument. Using personal opinion is a red herring fallacy as it is not relevant to why it should be true.
It seems to me like an extremely dangerous substance can be legal only if it has at least ONE practical purpose or it is embedded into society. I mean how many household chemicals are outright deadly if ingested but since they can clean stuff, they remain legal. Makes me wonder that if heroin could be used to clean your toilet if it would be legal.
Household chemicals do not have as high a potential for abuse as real drugs.
But this all comes down to personal responsibility. A person that is irresponsible and causes a negative outcome due to that irresponsibly should be punished. The person that uses a drug should know that they still hold responsibility for their actions and they should not be relieved of responsibility because their mind was altered by a drug they chose to use. It's a lot like the argument for guns. You still blame the person when they use a gun to hurt someone else, even if it's an accident.
This is implying a false analogy. Guns are legal because we have a right to keep the government in check. Do we need drugs for the same reason? No. We would like to minimize irresponsibility by drugs and guns, but we can only ban one of them due to a restraint one has that the other doesn't.
0
I'd say legalize a few, but regulate them in ways to prevent illegal activities.
Imagine if LSD was legal? It would be chaos... Stupid teenagers with stupid feuds would be lacing each other's foods.
Ecstasy is also too addictive, and causes well documented PERMANENT damage to the brain!
On the other hand, Marijuana is only illegal because of the cartel's monopoly over it. It COULD apparently affect short term memory in negative ways, but more unbias studies need to be conducted. I argue that marijuana is fine, and I support its legalization when sold to adults.
Salvia (Which ISN'T illegal yet) is also a more harmless drug. While it is a hallucinogen, it is also LEGAL, and might remain that way for a long time due to its short-lived effects.
Drugs, especially hallucinogens, can be dangerous because they alter how we function as a society. Try talking to someone high off cocaine or tripping on shrooms.
While responsible use is fine, we need to consider not everyone is responsible, and if legalized, WILL change how we look at society and handle these kinds of things.
What if there were recreational-drug centers? That sounds like a good solution to those who want to take things like Ketamine in a safe environment where medics could treat them if something goes wrong, while preventing hard drugs from getting in the hands of idiots.
Imagine if LSD was legal? It would be chaos... Stupid teenagers with stupid feuds would be lacing each other's foods.
Ecstasy is also too addictive, and causes well documented PERMANENT damage to the brain!
On the other hand, Marijuana is only illegal because of the cartel's monopoly over it. It COULD apparently affect short term memory in negative ways, but more unbias studies need to be conducted. I argue that marijuana is fine, and I support its legalization when sold to adults.
Salvia (Which ISN'T illegal yet) is also a more harmless drug. While it is a hallucinogen, it is also LEGAL, and might remain that way for a long time due to its short-lived effects.
Drugs, especially hallucinogens, can be dangerous because they alter how we function as a society. Try talking to someone high off cocaine or tripping on shrooms.
While responsible use is fine, we need to consider not everyone is responsible, and if legalized, WILL change how we look at society and handle these kinds of things.
What if there were recreational-drug centers? That sounds like a good solution to those who want to take things like Ketamine in a safe environment where medics could treat them if something goes wrong, while preventing hard drugs from getting in the hands of idiots.
0
Daedalus_ wrote...
Jash2o2 wrote...
That may be but it just seems like such a cop out. The government has given many baseless reasons for keeping things illegal, such as marijuana, but their only reason for keeping things worse than marijuana legal is because of how engrained in society they are. I find it all so foolish. Sure it is hard to prohibit alcohol but is it not just a matter of time before it becomes just as hard to prohibit anything else? It's already easier to get any hard drug than it is to get alcohol or tobacco.
Now you're just putting in personal opinion and misusing the same logic for legalizing marijuana vs alcohol. You also don't use any statistics that suggest marijuana use is becoming too prevalent to control.
First off, Jashin never said "marijuana is becoming too prevalent to control", though I do agree with that statement.
If you want statistics, just look at the jails; there are tons of people going to jail because of drug abuse. the government is unable to prevent the use of illegal drugs; all the government does is throw them in taxpayer-funded jails.
0
Lishy1 wrote...
Imagine if LSD was legal? It would be chaos... Stupid teenagers with stupid feuds would be lacing each other's foods.
I don't want to get into too much... but I owe my life to LSD. My father went on a religious quest after taking it, and that's how he met my mother. I wouldn't exist if it never did.
And about poisoning peoples' food.. if someone wanted to do that, there are numerous substances they could use. Why LSD? and why would it being legal for personal use, for adults, increase the likelihood of a teenager (who isn't supposed to have it anyway) using it in a way that would be illegal either way? It's not exactly worse if you poison someone with LSD over arsenic..
0
Jash2o2 wrote...
Sure it is hard to prohibit alcohol but is it not just a matter of time before it becomes just as hard to prohibit anything else?Daedalus_ wrote...
You also don't use any statistics that suggest marijuana use is becoming too prevalent to control.Lelouch24 wrote...
First off, Jashin never said "marijuana is becoming too prevalent to control", though I do agree with that statement."Just as hard to prohibit anything else" while talking about marijuana and "marijuana use becoming too prevalent to control" are the same, no?
Marijuana back fire is no where near as bad as alcohol prohibition. Even if it was becoming hard to control, that would be an argument for tighter restriction.
0
I voted for legalizing only marijuana. So many studies have been done and nothing conclusive has been found that hasn't been contradicted in another study. I personally don't believe it's "worse" than tobacco when taken in moderation. Just looking at the history of marijuana in the US, it shouldn't have been made illegal at all.
0
Daedalus_ wrote...
"Just as hard to prohibit anything else" while talking about marijuana and "marijuana use becoming too prevalent to control" are the same, no?The former compares the governments ability to control marijuana with its ability to control "anything else"; the latter just says that the government can't control marijuana.
If you think they're the same, then you're basically admitting that the government can't control anything.
