Don't deal here!

[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 )

[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.

[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. :-)

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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").

[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.

[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...

[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]

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]

I think everyone alive knows someone who's had a sad experience with mind-altering substances, both legal and illegal.

One of my niece's best friends died of a mix of prescription pain-killers and alcohol. She was pretty shaken by that, as you can well imagine. By all accounts a "good" family too. That girl's younger siblings are going to carry that baggage around for the rest of their lives.

It's not the drugs that are the real problem. The real problem is the part of our brains that craves mind-altering experiences. When I was a kid, THE way to get high was to crouch down, hyperventilate, then hold your breath and stand up suddenly (and have a mattress on the floor to land on when you blacked out).

As the comedian Dennis Miller once said, you could get rid of all the alcohol and all the drugs in the entire world and people would spin around in circles on their lawn until they fell down and saw God.

Kevin

[Mehen]

I had one friend OD and die on heroin last year and another nearly die a couple weeks ago.

MJ, fine, heroin I wouldn't legalize with the possible exception of use in hospitals only.

[KRSESQ]

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's what's happening now, despite the average $30 Billion US we've spent on drug interdiction and anti-drug campaigns every year since 1970.

And isn't it customary in Europe for parents to allow their children small amounts of alcohol under close supervision?

You do that in the States and it's jail time.

Kevin

[dZeus]

Making drug illegal doesn't necessarily help to reduce its consumption.

In fact, I'd argue by pushing marijuana into the street-dealing atmosphere would definitely increase its 'gateway-drug' potential as these dealers often sell stronger stuff too.

As umfriend said, legalizing marijuana would reduce costs to society as a whole tremendously (money saved on a failed war-on-drugs, and taxation of the product), reduce crime associated with production and distribution, and would guarantee its quality. Further more, if selling mj is controlled by the state, it's much easier to make consumption seem 'uncool' and thus reduce its usage by youth.

As for some stronger drugs, I'm all for legalizing personal consumption in very small quantities, as long as all production and sales occur through state-controlled entities.

Though I think legalization needs to be considered on a per-drug basis. I doubt whether legalizing crack-cocaine or methamphetamines would be a good idea.

War on drugs seems to be good only for commercial companies exploiting a prison system, and people selling the drugs. CIA anyone (e.g. Iran-Contra)? Another good study case (other than the massively failed war-on-drug in the US) would be the prohibition era.