Don't deal here!

[Kruzin]

Pot needs to be legalized in the states.
At least some states are heading in that direction.
Not talkin about harder drugs here.

And don't try to feed me the 'gateway drug' BS. I used to smoke pot. A LOT. For 20+ years. I only stopped because my lungs couldn't take it any more. It never led me to any harder drugs.

The taxes generated by legalized pot would eliminate the defecate in a few years.

Nobody will ever convince me that pot is worse for you than legal drugs like booze, ciggys, or even caffeine.

[KRSESQ]

The taxes generated by legalized pot would eliminate the defecate in a few years.

I don't know if I would go that far. And you might want to double-check your spelling on "deficit." (Although your version works too. )

It's easy to demonstrate that BEER is a "gateway drug."

Point out any burned-out wino in the gutter and I'll bet you dollars to donuts that he started out with one beer.

Kevin

[Kruzin]

I don't know if I would go that far. And you might want to double-check your spelling on "deficit." (Although your version works too. )

It's easy to demonstrate that BEER is a "gateway drug."

Point out any burned-out wino in the gutter and I'll bet you dollars to donuts that he started out with one beer.

Kevin

LoL
I just clicked through the spell checker.
Guess it picked the wrong spelling for 'deficit'

Any addictive substance can be labeled as a 'gateway drug'.
Coffee is a gateway drug.
Ciggys are a gateway drug.
It's all about the individuals tendencies and personal weaknesses.

I am a prick (more so than you already think I am) in the mornings till I've had my first cup of coffee. My co-workers will attest to that. That caffeine sooths my attitude.
How is that not an addiction?

But that drug is legal, so it's ok...

[TransformX]

Caffeine and nicotine, unlike Alcohol and some of the harder drugs don't turn you into a walking/driving hazard.
I've never heard of Caffeine or nicotine induced acts of violence. Alcohol on the other hand, now that's a whole different opera.

[VJ]

Problem is that a person's "ability" to get addicted to substances is actually genetically determined. So some people are much more prone to get an addition to substances (even innocent ones) that other people.
So in my book, people who deal drugs should be severely punished, but addicts should be helped to kick off.

I do mostly agree with TransformX: if someone has an addiction to coffee or nicotine, it doesn't have the same impact on society as if the person were to have addiction to alcohol or so. But if the person does not have the means to support the addiction, it still may still result in "small criminality" (I hate this word: if somebody steels my wallet is it small criminality, but I'd have a lot of problems) to get the means (and of course, the more expensive the substance the person is addicted to, the more it starts moving away from "small criminality").

[Umfriend]

In other words, ODing is okay, buy cheap high quality Heroin and OD yourself to death, we're cool. Or take any substance without a doctor's prescription and step out to mingle with sane society.. How about removing the ban on alcohol and give it to children?
And that, my friend, is just the tip of the iceberg.

That is not what I have said. Please don't quote me when arguing with whatever someone else, apparantly, has argued.

[Umfriend]

I do mostly agree with TransformX: if someone has an addiction to coffee or nicotine, it doesn't have the same impact on society as if the person were to have addiction to alcohol or so. But if the person does not have the means to support the addiction, it still may still result in "small criminality" (I hate this word: if somebody steels my wallet is it small criminality, but I'd have a lot of problems) to get the means (and of course, the more expensive the substance the person is addicted to, the more it starts moving away from "small criminality").

I'll ask again then: what would be the price of MJ, coke, heroin etc, if they were legally produced and sold, controlled one way or the other by the state? I don't see anyone having to get criminal to support the habit then.

I don't see why an ounce of grass would need to be more costly than, say, a box of paracetamol. When was the last time your wallet was stolen by someone who was desperate to get rid of his headache?

I have not seen anyone arguing that one should be allowed to drive (or fly ) under the influence of these substances either.

[Brian Ellis]

You don't have to be an addict to cause an alcohol-related road accident. A glass of wine with a meal does not constitute addiction.

When I was a kid (c. 11 y-o), I remember stealing cigarettes from my mother; I was a petty criminal!!!

There are countries with harsh repression and little drug problem, apart from this one. Take Singapore and Malaysia as examples. Death penalty for dealing or possession of more than a few grams, several years for possession below the limit. Zero tolerance and it works. Of course, there are always some idiots who take the risk; they have to take the consequences. As there is so little drug available, it is relatively easy for the police to follow the supply chain backwards to get the big haul of the baron, as in the first message in this thread.

Probably over 50% of the drugs in this country are brought in by tourists who finance their holiday by 100 ecstasy tablets or some grams of cannabis. The cops are very active keeping an eye (and some canine nostrils) open at the airports and round the clubs in the resorts, especially Ayia Napa. It is estimated that a youngster bringing in enough for his own consumption over two weeks has a 75-80% chance of being caught. Bins are provided for users to dump their goods before the control area at the airports and notices are handed out in the planes describing the zero tolerance policy and the harsh prison sentences.

Unfortunately, there is some traffic coming in from the illegal Turkish-invaded area. More difficult to control a 170 km long barrier policed by the UN. The last time (~5 years ago) I came back from that area, my car and persons (as were all others) were quite thoroughly searched and I can hardly imagine I look like the archtypical dealer. Interestingly, they knew all the nooks and crannies in the car where stuff could be hidden, including some I didn't know of myself! They must have training for all the popular models.

[VJ]

I'll ask again then: what would be the price of MJ, coke, heroin etc, if they were legally produced and sold, controlled one way or the other by the state? I don't see anyone having to get criminal to support the habit then.

You need to protect some people from themselves: the addiction to some substances may impact their productivity, resulting in loss of their job and thus you are back down to people not being able to support their addiction and back to criminality. Coffee and nicotine addiction don't really have this downside, but other addictive products like heroin might. Furthermore, long term health issues are also a problem (IMO this is also one of the reasons why smoking should be discouraged) with many drugs, as people getting ill as a result of an addiction is costly to society (apart from the human-emotional issue) due to healthcare costs (this may depend on the country).

I don't see why an ounce of grass would need to be more costly than, say, a box of paracetamol. When was the last time your wallet was stolen by someone who was desperate to get rid of his headache?

I only agree with this for helping people stop their addiction, so it should be well controlled and not free-over-the-counter.

I have not seen anyone arguing that one should be allowed to drive (or fly ) under the influence of these substances either.

Well, that is a different discussion altogether. :-)

[Umfriend]

Oh, come on! Millions of users in the US who function in challenging high-demanding functions. Millions of users who kicked the habit just cause they grew over it. How many users, pray tell me, fell of the wagon that could have been prevented had drug abuse not been illegal (and therefore tremendously costly) and stigmatised. Sure, it should be discouraged as smoking and alcohol-abuse is (that is actually my position, thanks for the support!).

And then, my question remains unanswered. What would be the consumer-price of these substances if their production and sale were supervised but legal and how many people would not choose to become criminal, solely to support a habit?

Meanwhile, how do you protect innocent people who happen to live near an illegal marketplace where competition is fought not with price, quality or marketing but with guns? By making trade illicit you are provoking criminality. How do you prevent scrupulous people making millions that then have to white-wash their funds and infect the bona-fide world?

I don't understand how some judgemental view on what people should or should not do can justify a policy that is harmfull in so many ways and to so many people that have nothing to do with the matter at hand.

[Evildead666]

Cigarettes are just as bad as Heroin.
Nicotine is a very very addictive drug, which would be banned today if it came out now.

All the hard drug addictions should be considered medical problems. For most of these people, they can no longer control their habit, and it is consuming them.
Putting them into a jail where everything under the sun is available is NOT the best idea.

Legalising the softer drugs, and recouping the money in taxes etc, but making the products much cheaper than the illegaly imported stuff...

The Gov'ts do not want to legalise any of it, since they are making the money in other ways, more money supposedly for the Police and Border Patrols.....Yeah, like they won't take bribes...
The money would never reach them anyway.....

We, the people, are seen as sheep, with money.
As long as we keep on paying taxes everywhere, and on everything, more than once or it wouldn't be fair...
If we all stopped paying taxes, stating "I'm not happy with what you are doing with my money" then the Gov't would probably bang you up as an example, but if everyone did it, there would be mayhem.

Coke, Heroin and Ecstacy are pointless, with no real use. Add Nicotine to them.

Stop banging people up for possession and usage of lowly drugs, and give them a medical.

Ban alcohol and Tobacco. Should be good for a few riots and laughs.
I smoke, and wouldn't mind. (would be a complete ucontrollable git for a couple of weeks, but hey, nothings free )

[Brian Ellis]

Cigarettes are just as bad as Heroin.
Nicotine is a very very addictive drug, which would be banned today if it came out now.

It is slowly going that way, not by legislation but by stigmatising smokers and restricting where they can practise their habit. Results:
- large decrease in the number of smokers in all countries where such restrictions are in place
- reduction of tax revenues
- improvement in public health (slow, may take 20-30 years for full effect)
- tobacco companies diversifying

However, if you had ever had anything to do with a heroin addict, you would know damn well that comparing him/her with a tobacco addict is ridiculous. I used to smoke 60+/day but gave it up cold turkey, as have millions of others. OK, I was a bear with a sore head for 2-3 weeks, but nothing compared to heroin withdrawal, the sheer agony of which is what causes addicts to turn to any means to get their fix. I saw my ex-employee when he could not get a dose; he was hardly a human being. Methadone did not help much. He kept asking for his job back and I said he could have it when he was clean and he tried, oh, how he tried, going to all lengths, but he could not do it. Eventually, a dirty needle did it for him; his general condition was so poor (malnutrition, diverse infections, in a special hostel that was so overloaded with desperate cases) that he succumbed in about 6 months from diagnosis (this was about 30 years ago). In two years, he had gone from being a first-class electronics technician doing a good job for me, via a total wreck, into the grave. Quel gaspillage d'une vie The only good thing is that he managed to keep away from the police. Never, ever, try to tell me that nicotine is socially the same as heroin (and I hate to think how much he had cost the collectivity over the last year of his life: at least enough to match my salary + bonuses as CEO over 5-10 years).

[Umfriend]

He might have been a human being if he could simply have gotten a fix at a buck or 2. He might not have been occupied with worry over his next fix either. He might not have had to use a dirty needle. Is it your position that the experiences with heroin addicts would be similar had it been a legal substance?

[VJ]

Oh, come on! Millions of users in the US who function in challenging high-demanding functions. Millions of users who kicked the habit just cause they grew over it. How many users, pray tell me, fell of the wagon that could have been prevented had drug abuse not been illegal (and therefore tremendously costly) and stigmatised. Sure, it should be discouraged as smoking and alcohol-abuse is (that is actually my position, thanks for the support!).

I'm not debating that there are people that can work and be productive even despite an addiction (maybe even thanks to the addiction), but my guess is that more people would not be able to handle it responsibly.
A stupid comparison: if everybody would drive responsibly, there would be no need for speed cameras, or many of the road legislation

And then, my question remains unanswered. What would be the consumer-price of these substances if their production and sale were supervised but legal and how many people would not choose to become criminal, solely to support a habit?

Well, I must admit it is an interesting point... but the legalization of cannabis in the Netherlands was (and still is) not without its problems...
But I do agree that providing a more non-illegal means for people to get their drugs would tend to decrease criminality. But I'm just weary of the side effects it would bring along (more addicts?), which is why it is such a difficult matter. It is not a decision one country should make, as this would bring in drug tourism etc.

[dZeus]

I'm not debating that there are people that can work and be productive even despite an addiction (maybe even thanks to the addiction), but my guess is that more people would not be able to handle it responsibly.
A stupid comparison: if everybody would drive responsibly, there would be no need for speed cameras, or many of the road legislation governments would find different ways to finance budget deficits

Well, I must admit it is an interesting point... but the legalization of cannabis in the Netherlands was (and still is) not without its problems...
But I do agree that providing a more non-illegal means for people to get their drugs would tend to decrease criminality. But I'm just weary of the side effects it would bring along (more addicts?), which is why it is such a difficult matter.

here, I corrected it for you.

Oh, and cannabis is not legalized in the Netherlands. I think it should be though. The current situation is rather mad where criminal organizations make lots of money on the production/supply side, and costs a lot of money for law enforcement to crack down on them while sales/consumption, while illegal, is tolerated. Legalizing it probably would get rid of most of the issues of the current implementation of the policy. Though it be best if it was only allowed to be sold to inhabitants of the Netherlands, to prevent drug tourism in the border areas.