Legalization of Drug use...

[HollyBerri]

Speaking of taxing the snot out of cigarettes... Here in NYC, they're running between $4.39 - $4.95 a pack at the moment, prices having increased by more than a dollar over the past quarter-year.

The interesting twist is... about the only way to get cigs at some kind of affordable price is to buy them from... the Indians...

Apparently one of the concessions designed to recompense Native Americans for having stolen their land and killed a lot of them and imprisoned the rest on reservations is that they can buy cigarettes very cheap... so they resell them.

Don't quite know how this relates, except that it reminds me of homeless people retrieving hundreds of deposit bottles (we pay a nickle for the 'use' of the bottle many drinks come in... if we return the bottle to the store, we get the nickle back. Many people just throw the bottles in the recycling) from public and private garbage receptacles to make a few bucks a nickle at a time... which manages again to provide a service to everyone from a basis of oppression and humiliation.

It tells us something about the cleverness born of true (financial, in this case) desperation and desire to survive.

Don't forget, water finds its own level, and people generally work things out... so don't let's be too sure we even know what would happen if such legalization became fact.

----------------------
Holly

[This message has been edited by HollyBerri (edited 25 April 2000).]

[merchant2112]

i tryed drugs , i don't like them, but i am for makeing them legal. leagal drugs would solve 80% of drug problems.

[Himself]

Are we talking all drugs or just pot? For some drugs, all it's takes is one dose and you are an effective addict already. I can't imagine the US Government legalising all types of drugs, or allowing them to be sold for dirt with no say in who gets them.
Crack for $5 at your corner store, I don't think so. You have to consider the current situation and the society involved.

As for prostitution, well, I was just brainstorming on the topic, I have no idea how all that works on the street. But if it costs $100 to get drugs to enslave someone or $20, I think it would happen a lot more at $20. It's just safer for the pimp to obtain them, they make more money with cheaper drugs as well. It's not like alchohol, certain drugs can have an immediate and devastating effect. Pot may be relatively harmless compared to some drugs, but there are real nasty things out there that shouldn't be legal, no matter what.

As for Government advertising, does legal tobacco mean less "no smoking" advertising?
How about drinking and driving, that's not legal, yet there is plenty of advertising against that, would making it legal mean less?

Border enforcement? As long as there are illegal substances there will have to be border enforcement, if it's not one drug then it will be another. Unless ALL drugs are made legal, this paticular problem will still be around. And even if it were, you now have all these criminal types without a market, you know they will just find another one. People can't switch additions, if they are hooked on crack that means they want crack, not pot.

Here in Canada, cigarettes in a few provinces were made tax free, to curb smuggling of cigarettes and the violence surrounding it, all that happened was the smuggling was added to the internal borders as well as international. Break ins and theft of cigarettes from stores didn't decrease at all.

I just think it's a very complicated subject and simplistic solutions never give you simplistic results.



[This message has been edited by Himself (edited 25 April 2000).]

[Gurm]

Are we talking all drugs or just pot? For some drugs, all it's takes is one dose and you are an effective addict already. I can't imagine the US Government legalising all types of drugs, or allowing them to be sold for dirt with no say in who gets them.
Crack for $5 at your corner store, I don't think so.

Why? Things would get really ugly, and then really good. Simple.

You have to consider the current situation and the society involved.

Ahhhh. Now you've hit the nail on the head. The problem isn't the issue at hand, it's how to deal with the issue at hand when you're talking about American Society (largely an oxymoron). We are the most hypocritical nation on earth.

As for prostitution, well, I was just brainstorming on the topic, I have no idea how all that works on the street. But if it costs $100 to get drugs to enslave someone or $20, I think it would happen a lot more at $20. It's just safer for the pimp to obtain them, they make more money with cheaper drugs as well.

No, your logic falls apart. The reason pimps can enslave youngsters now is that the drugs are illegal. So they shoot up the little girlie, she has to put out in order to get more heroin, right? Well, not if heroin is available at home... she just goes home to mommy and daddy, tells them about the bad pervert, and gets some heroin from the corner store. The pimp has no more power, since he can't control the drug habit any more.

It's not like alchohol, certain drugs can have an immediate and devastating effect. Pot may be relatively harmless compared to some drugs, but there are real nasty things out there that shouldn't be legal, no matter what.

Ahh... the old fallback... DRUGS ARE BAD, MMMKAY? Look, there are really nasty legal things. It is LEGAL to jump out of an airplane without a parachute. People have done it. Smart? No. Legal? Yes.

It's LEGAL to skydive. Skydiving kills more people yearly than many drugs. It's LEGAL to wrestle alligators. It's LEGAL to get a thousand deadly cobras and put them in your shower with you. It's LEGAL to do all kinds of extremely dangerous things, because they give you a RUSH. Nobody thinks it's smart, but they don't dare impinge your right to do these dangerous things.

As for Government advertising, does legal tobacco mean less "no smoking" advertising?

Tobacco has never been illegal. Bad analogy.

How about drinking and driving, that's not legal, yet there is plenty of advertising against that, would making it legal mean less?

Umm... this is also a bad analogy. Drinking and driving is a totally different thing. And yes, legalizing alcohol after prohibition caused an immediate drop, across the board, in law enforcement costs. No more organized crime in the liquor industry. No more crackdowns on speakeasies. It was a golden boon for the police and FBI.

Border enforcement? As long as there are illegal substances there will have to be border enforcement, if it's not one drug then it will be another. Unless ALL drugs are made legal, this paticular problem will still be around. And even if it were, you now have all these criminal types without a market, you know they will just find another one.

RIGHT NOW, it is 100 times more profitable to smuggle Freon into Miami than it is to smuggle cocaine into Miami. And less illegal. However, there is a guaranteed easy market for cocaine. I agree that criminals will always be criminals - let them find something open to do that's wrong. If they're selling crack, it happens in a crackhouse, or in an alley. If they're robbing a bank, they are easier to catch. Let them rob banks.

People can't switch additions, if they are hooked on crack that means they want crack, not pot.

Nobody is saying they can. What we're saying is that if they're gonna abuse, they're gonna abuse, legal or not. If it's legal it no longer carries all the ancillary problems.

Here in Canada, cigarettes in a few provinces were made tax free, to curb smuggling of cigarettes and the violence surrounding it, all that happened was the smuggling was added to the internal borders as well as international. Break ins and theft of cigarettes from stores didn't decrease at all.

I'm not saying decrease the cost by a dollar a pack. That's small change. I'm saying decrease the cost from $500 for a little bit of blow to $5. Smuggling will DISAPPEAR.

I just think it's a very complicated subject and simplistic solutions never give you simplistic results.

I disagree. Simple solutions ALWAYS have simple results, in the long term. I admit there will be short-term chaos. But it will be worth it.

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[Himself]

Why? Things would get really ugly, and then really good. Simple.

Sure, kill all the drug users and the drug dealers, alao a simple solution that's ugly at first but then is really good. It doesn't solve the problem of why they were there in the first place.

quote:
No, your logic falls apart.

It's not about pure logic, if that were the case nobody would do drugs to start with.

The reason pimps can enslave youngsters now is that the drugs are illegal. So they shoot up the little girlie, she has to put out in order to get more heroin, right? Well, not if heroin is available at home... she just goes home to mommy and daddy, tells them about the bad pervert, and gets some heroin from the corner store. The pimp has no more power, since he can't control the drug habit any more.

For most prostitutes there is no option of turning to mommy or daddy. Most are runaways to start with. Dependence is not just about having the money to pay for something, it gets psychological as well.

Ahh... the old fallback... DRUGS ARE BAD, MMMKAY? Look, there are really nasty legal things.

You can kill yourself many ways, but putting knives in the hands of babies and setting up booby traps in stores isn't justified because of it. Some drugs are not as deadly as others, but where do you draw the line or legislate how bad they have to be to be illegal? I wouldn't have a problem with legalized pot, people on pot are just stupid, not crazed maniacs out of control. But then again, why don't people just drink instead of do drugs? It's safer and costs less, why not? It would be the logical way to go, wouldn't it? Thing is, it's not about logic, it's about human behaviour, people with the kind of problems that result in drug abuse gravitate to the worst thing they can do to themselves out of depression.

As for Government advertising, does legal tobacco mean less "no smoking" advertising?


Tobacco has never been illegal. Bad analogy.

Better than comparing leathal drugs to sky diving.

How about drinking and driving, that's not legal, yet there is plenty of advertising against that, would making it legal mean less?

Umm... this is also a bad analogy. Drinking and driving is a totally different thing.

And yet, sky diving is exactly the same as drug use, right? It is advertising to prevent behaviour you want to control, exact same thing, it wouldn't go away just because the means is now legal.

And yes, legalizing alcohol after prohibition caused an immediate drop, across the board, in law enforcement costs. No more organized crime in the liquor industry. No more crackdowns on speakeasies. It was a golden boon for the police and FBI.

It didn't stop drunk driving or domestic violence related to alcoholism. And it's not like the sale of beer could kill you if you took too many in the space of a minute.
Drugs are more like a loaded gun whereas alhohol is more like a club, you can kill yourself either way, but at least with alchohol you have time to change your mind.

According to your way of thinking, everybody should be allowed to build their own atomic weapons in their basement.

RIGHT NOW, it is 100 times more profitable to smuggle Freon into Miami than it is to smuggle cocaine into Miami. And less illegal.

And where do they get the Freon? It's not like growing poppies by the field for practically nothing.

However, there is a guaranteed easy market for cocaine. I agree that criminals will always be criminals - let them find something open to do that's wrong. If they're selling crack, it happens in a crackhouse, or in an alley. If they're robbing a bank, they are easier to catch. Let them rob banks.

That's not a simple result, now is it? You wanted fewer drug problems, now you have more problems elsewhere.

People can't switch additions, if they are hooked on crack that means they want crack, not pot.

Nobody is saying they can. What we're saying is that if they're gonna abuse, they're gonna abuse, legal or not. If it's legal it no longer carries all the ancillary problems.

I think it would get rid of some problems and create different ones. The problem is the society, without fixing that, the rest is just a side effect, you are just moving the problem around. Instead of gun related violence you could have people on the street in comas or dying of exposure because they were too whacked out of their skulls to come in out of the cold.

If a government legalizes pot but not heroin, nothing will change for existing users of heroin. It's not a solution for existing problems, it could mean that future dependency driven people choose pot instead of heroin, but people intent on killing themselves by inches tend to gravitate to the worst that's out there. They could choise booze instead but for their own reasons they chose drugs.

I'm not saying decrease the cost by a dollar a pack. That's small change. I'm saying decrease the cost from $500 for a little bit of blow to $5. Smuggling will DISAPPEAR.

It was more like by half actually. It would have to be sold legally for less than the costs of the people selling it illegally.
We are talking about Goverment taxing things, there is smuggling involved today is just avoiding the difference between taxed and untaxed items. Locally, that applies to cigarettes and alhohol, at least that's what gets reported on the news.

I just think it's a very complicated subject and simplistic solutions never give you simplistic results.

I disagree. Simple solutions ALWAYS have simple results, in the long term. I admit there will be short-term chaos. But it will be worth it.

Well, simple could be true, give away drugs like candy and the simple result could be more drug addicts, not necessarily a good result, but simple. You can also kill all babies with birth defects you don't like, or let aids patients die, that would solve the problems of handicapped parking and paying for aids medication, a simple solution as well.

[Compton]

You can also kill all babies with birth defects you don't like, or let aids patients die, that would solve the problems of handicapped parking and paying for aids medication, a simple solution as well.

sounds good to me

[cancer]

It seems the ‘drug legalisation question’ is an issue that just about every developed country has a problem with and it isn’t about to go away any time soon…
I guess where drugs are concerned, one must keep the whole thing in perspective. This is incredibly difficult if one is a mother, father, sister, brother, lover & friend alike. Wether we like it or not we are one of these things & to see someone close destroy themselves on these things is soul wrenching. I’m with Himself on this one, life can be a goddamn mess sometimes and escapism is a viable solution to people with little to hope for. One could go as far to say that in a modern day utopia drugs won’t be necessary because everyone’s got their shit together, however I don’t think our lives is going to turn out like a episode of star trek any time soon either…
So here we all are in an imperfect world where drugs are reality. What do we to curb the problem? Do we as a community condemn our fellow man/women because they are shit out of luck? Do we capture them and send them through the courts/prison system where they come out more screwed than when they went in? Do spend tax money and train specialist individuals like police, lawyers, psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, teachers, prison guards, doctor’s etc to go into damage control mode?
Why throw good money after bad? Why persecute drug users & pushers alike. You punish the user and often the ‘instituted’ solution is worse than the affliction or at least the good that is done is far out weighed by the bad. You punish the pusher/seller/supplier and the price goes up & socioeconomic boundaries come into play.
Enter drug-related crime, users gotta foot the high cost of the end product because their supplier got busted and all their gear was confiscated. So now our ‘shit out luck, out of a local dealer’ user gotta go to his suppliers competitor who has just jacked up the prices because Snow White Harry on the next block is doing five to seven in D bloc. Out outta luck loser user gotta find a way to make up the difference for the gear he hooked on. The only job he can get is minium wage shit shovelling at the local quickie mart because they lost that good money job due to poor performance because their brain is wired on bad speed and their paranoid has hell that everyone is going to get ‘em. Money’s real tight because he’s gotta feed three kids at home and he’s three months overdue on car payments & the two story redbrick house is about to be repossessed by the bank. The market in a constant state of flux due to old suppliers being pruned by the feds and new suppliers moving in to take their place. Demand is high so it a sellers market so the cost hike for poor pleb Phil forced his hand to short change the till at the quickie mart but he gets caught because Abdul installed security cameras last week. Now Phil got a sore arse and a bad case of withdrawal shivers in the local pen but that’s ok because he sees Snow White Harry up to old tricks in D bloc. Phil gets out for good behaviour and has to move to a housing commission. His kids are now local gang bangers and his wife is turning tricks to feed her sadly misaligned kids and feed her own growing drug habit. Phil’s pissed cause he can’t find a job & his wife’s a harlot and his kid’s marks at school suck. The wife OD’s and one of the kids has gone missing and latter found in a dumpster riddled with 7.62mm rounds from an AK. And so the serpent eats it tail.
Granted this is an over exaggerated figment of my imagination but pushing the realms of impossibility it is not. Our society condones cigarettes & booze, which kills more people worldwide than sad story Ods. The only things we are helping in this instance are drug growers, labs, distributors & sellers. They reap from the mistakes of the shortsighted goals of government administrators sensitive to voters fears. Public officials want to hang on to two terms in office so they can qualify for that six-figure pension. Forcing the drug industry underground only makes druglord fat cats rich. With this financial power they corrupt at will to get their product on the market. So why are we helping these pricks? Prohibiting the supply & use of drugs only aids the monopoly of neighbourhood drug stores and doesn’t stop people from getting the ‘goods’. Deregulating the market won’t stop it either but at least the government can recoup some of that dead money poured in ill-conceived schemes to prevent it.
The only problem is it can’t be half-arsed. Giving one state the privilege allows it to rake in money shipping elsewhere.
This is the exact scenario we have observed in Australia. In the state of South Australia people are allowed to grow three plants of marijuana per household (it used to be was ten plants/ personal use only). Which is great, people don’t get busted for bullshit possession and money spent on local crime prevention is better used somewhere else, however there is a big industry in moving the stuff to other states. I know people who have been doing this for years and own their house fully decked out plus two fully owned imported cars and they are in their mid twenties. They aren’t brain surgeons by trade or particularly bright naturally. They have average paid jobs and clean up on good harvests (granted they grow a few more than three plants) tax-free. Sure if you legalise the industry some problems might arise however as time passes and education becomes better on the subject this usage will subside to less problematic numbers. Look at smoking now (in Australia at least) less people are talking it up as the affects are becoming very well known.
I say let the ship sink and get snorkels. I think the saliva is beginning to dry on my chin now, best stop ranting.
Cheers.


------------------
Aopen HX08 full tower case, Asus P3V4X bios 1.03, P!!! FC-PGA 550e @733, 160M pc100 sdram, Matrox G400MAX bios 1.4 PDesk 5.52.015, Seagate 28.5G Ultra ATA66 7200rpm HD, Pioneer 103s DVD 6X/32X drive, SB AWE64 Gold ISA sound card, SMC pci ethernet adaptor, Castlewood Orb 2.2G media drive, Nortel 100 cable modem, Mitsubishi 1995 19in monitor, occasionally use dualhead for dvd on a Sony 80cm Wega TV, MS natural keyboard, MS Intellimouse Explorer,
Win98SE 4.10.2222A, DX7a.



[This message has been edited by cancer (edited 25 April 2000).]

[Gurm]

I think the thing that the nay-sayers refuse to realise is that PEOPLE WILL ALWAYS DO BAD THINGS.

If you told people it was illegal to use corrugated cardboard as underwear, there would be a group of people, mostly teenagers, who would be walking around feeling clandestinely rebellious with their corrugated cardboard panties.

That's just how it is. You can't change it. There will always be drunks. There will always be stoners. There will always be junkies.

However, it seems a bit illogical that in a country where the people are (in theory... let's not get into actualities) trusted to "run the government" and "elect their leaders", and "make informed decisions"; in this same country, these same people are regarded as too stupid to regulate their own intake of intoxicating substances.

How foolish is that? VERY.

There are so many arguments FOR legalization, and the only arguments I ever hear AGAINST it are:

...But, drugs are BAD. Mmmmkay?

...But, then everyone would be a druggie! And that's BAD - Mmmmkay?

...But if drugs were legal, then ANYONE could get the BAD DRUGS, and that would be BAD - Mmmmkay?

I'm not picking on anyone, I'm just saying that the anti-legalization people need some better arguments. On the pro-legalization side we have positive statistics, and actual cost-benefits to ALL areas of the populace and political establishment.

On their side they say "CRIME WILL GO UP!", where on our side we have countries with proven track records where crime is some of the lowest in the world.

On their side they say "EVERYONE WILL BE AN ABUSER!", and on our side we have the majority of Europe, where children are free to imbibe to excess - but don't.

So, failing all else, they fall back on "BUT DRUGS ARE BAAAAAAAAD". Well, who are they to judge?

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[Rags]

In the US, I would like to believe that we have a constitution, a Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence that were written with many liberties in mind, one of them being that an adult US citizen has full right over his/her body, and (s)he can do with his/her body whatever they damn well please to. If one wants to mess their brain/body up with drugs, well let it be their problem. You can sit here and argue that the government can't allow us to do everything with our bodies we want, and I agree. I agree that we have an understanding that if one abuses the individual freedoms/well-being of another individual, it should be a crime...PERIOD. Legalization of drugs would be the constitutional thing to do with this philosophy. Why, when all these drug users go out and steal, drive while intoxicated, and neglect their children because of their addiction? Because all of these things are ALREADY illegal. And I believe that these crimes should carry more punishment, but no one will ever convince me that I should not be able to do to my body what I want to do to my body, so long as it doesn't interfere with another's freedom/well-being.

Rags

[cancer]

i'm not saying there is a moral high ground to preach down from. people are intitled to their opinions etc. i think we need a more common sense approach to the whole issue.
Why are we making a niche for the drug industry to exploit. Legalise it, tax it and control its quality & its output. Finally state its affects on the human body.
Educate educate educate… people who shot up heroin/speed etc were sharing needles, people were having unprotected sex when aids was in its infancy. Suddenly aids hits us, bang everyone’s scared, people start being cautious. People start using sterilised /disposable needles & blokes start wearing dingers.
People are generally not blatantly stupid, careless/foolish yes(exceptions, darwin awards
& people with extremely low intelligence quotas..same thing is guess). We are human and we have evolved over thousands of years to become a sentient species, however we are still an animal therefore instinct still drives us. Basic animal instinct gives us a strong survival mechanism, despite how shitty things become, we still have the will/pull to live.
Himself, when you mentioned that giving away drugs would cause a heath issue with unborn infants, look what living in a developed country does. We all live in first world/developed counties yes? Living in this society has its own issues. Due to worldwide pollution the sperm count in the average male over the last fifty years has dropped below half it originally was.
I’m getting tired of this subject, we are so blind to a myriad of things going on in our lives but a ‘no tolerance’ to this issue isn’t going to make it go away.
Cheers.



------------------
Aopen HX08 full tower case, Asus P3V4X bios 1.03, P!!! FC-PGA 550e @733, 160M pc100 sdram, Matrox G400MAX bios 1.4 PDesk 5.52.015, Seagate 28.5G Ultra ATA66 7200rpm HD, Pioneer 103s DVD 6X/32X drive, SB AWE64 Gold ISA sound card, SMC pci ethernet adaptor, Castlewood Orb 2.2G media drive, Nortel 100 cable modem, Mitsubishi 1995 19in monitor, occasionally use dualhead for dvd on a Sony 80cm Wega TV, MS natural keyboard, MS Intellimouse Explorer,
Win98SE 4.10.2222A, DX7a.