Legalization of Drugs

Yes, and those people would be put in jail. But the addicts who commit the majority of the crimes to innocent people will no longer do so in order to pay for their fix. The violent pusher will need to find another source of income, and no source in remotely as lucrative than drugs. Look what legalizing gambling did to the mob, the lottery and online betting has practically bankrupted them. Lets remove drugs from their portfolio now. Within a few years the violent ones will kill off each other or be sent to prison. And in the near future, as drug use crime decreases jails will have more room to lock up the truly dangerous individual longer and quicker not after their 3rd or forth offense.

And I didn't even mention the thousands of Mexicans that die in the cartel wars every year and the flight of our currency to mexico

 

If you're against legalization you're not going to pop oxy either way (assuming you're not a massive hypocrite).

Legalize all drugs. Not just recreational drugs, all food and drugs. No more prohibitions on raw milk, abolish the FDA. Found some white pill on the concrete in some dark back alley? Advertise it honestly and appropriately and you should legally be able to sell it in your store.

This goes back to 1906 and recreational drugs are just one part of the real problem: that we are no longer free to choose what to put in our bodies.

 

Sure it is, if by the underlined you mean "utterly impossible".

Yes.

Please, you have no idea what the hell you're talking about.

 

By that standard we should ban alcohol as well. Guns should be banned. Fast and junk food should be banned... These all produce plenty of victims. And fast food is addictive for food addicts just as drugs are to drug addicts. Alcohol has killed more people than all illegal drugs combined.

 

How much public resource should be directed toward restitution for "harm" that can't be identified and quantified?

 

Why don't you just describe the sense in which there is a victim?

 

Well I think efforts expended are best where there is the greatest impact. the war on drugs is a massive failure, turning millions into criminals and creating a huge underground economy that is terrorizing whole neighborhoods.

 

I most certainly do, I have lost 1/2 dozen friends to death from drugs since the 70s. . I have a close friend that lost two of his children to drugs. I abused drugs for close to 20 years and have been clean for over 30 years now. A pusher will sell you heroin laced with fetanyl, that is what is causing all the overdoses. No quality control, he has no idea of how much his product has been laced with or how many times it has been stepped on.

 

Not sure I'd go that far But if it's going to end up like San Fran were state funded junkie fix stations are handing out tax payer rigs and methadone to people no longer functioning citizens, then something should be done. This country has far more pressing monetary problems to take care of than a culture that can't control or pay for their habits without the help of productive sober taxpayers.

 

Like I said, I'm fine with it, as long as the taxpayer isn't on the dime of those that get addicted to drugs by paying for the revolving door of rehab.

 

I'm pretty sure whatever the OP is alluding to would leave the taxpayer on the dime for less than he currently is.

 

Norm may be a bad word, perhaps more prevalent is better.

 

You think a drug addict is free to choose what to put in his body?

First, I never mentioned banning anything. Second, alcohol can be consumed responsibly, whereas many other substances cannot, except as treatment for medical conditions.

Yeah, thanks for the stupid.

How the hell should I know? Restitution was your harebrained idea, not mine.

Really? You need an explanation as to how a person who gives his (or someone else's) substance in exchange for an experience that is invariably degrading is victimized?

Really??

No you don't. If you did, you'd know that for an abuser, bad dope is the only kind there is.

 

From reading the replies in this thread, there are a lot of dumb people who support prohibition. Prohibition prevents people from making an informed decision on whether or not to do drugs. Which is in large part why people doing said drugs impacts society in a negative way. With prohibition, there's no "responsible" dose recommendation. Not only that but yeah the funding of criminal activities and terrorism to boot. It's no secret that terrorist organizations are involved with drug cartels via money, arms, etc. But prohibition supporters have a track record of liking to tell people what they can and cannot do with their bodies so it's no surprise that they can't see that their position lacks reason and logic.

 

If you can't quantify harm to anyone, then there should be no crime. If you can quantify harm, then the victim should be made whole.

You seem to have a difficult time with the open exchange of ideas without becoming frustrated, perhaps cute animal pictures will help.

 

The problem is people don't seem to understand that the harm connected to illicit drugs currently has more to do with prohibition. When you make a product only available in a black market with criminal entities, then they're the only ones to make a profit.

 

The biggest drug problem in this country today is prescription drugs. And when an MD destroys a patient's life they need to be held accountable and the victim made whole to the extent they can be and the MD needs to be held financially responsible for the harm s/he has caused.

 

You forget the legal red tape which protects MDs. That they can be paid shills to push a pill with no consequences.

 

I think he should be. He is not free to at the moment though, no. Unless his favored drug is alcohol, nicotine, or anything he can get OTC or through prescription.

 

Alcohol is the most abused drug on the planet. 10,000 people a year are killed in the US due to drunk driving alone and there are an estimated 17.6 million alcoholics.

 

Unless you see fit to demonstrate otherwise, I'm gonna go ahead and assume you missed the point on purpose.

So just how do you propose to quantify the harm done to victims of child molestation, Brainiac?

Making victims whole is the province of civil law, not criminal law.

A conceit you find comforting, no doubt.

Not a syllable of this militates against anything I've said, obviously.

 

You said alcohol can be consumed responsibly. That is true for any drug. And any drug can be abused. Alcohol is the most abused drug. So your point is moot.

 

No it isn't, as I explained above.

 

But if you raise the price, everyone will just steal and traffic humans to obtain the drugs. Don't you know what happens to your brain on drugs? Did you forget the fried egg? When someone can no longer be rational, or maintain employment, and they put other people's lives in jeopardy, and they have all kinds of health consequences -- who's gonna pay for all that welfare and medicaid?

Just to make a lab experiment come to life for you:
a lab rat was trained to tap a lever to administer a dose of opioids into its system. When the rat's front right paw was removed, the rat used its left front paw. When the left front paw was amputated, it used one hind leg, and then the other. When all four of the rat's legs had been amputated, it scootched up and pressed the lever with its nose. This sad experiment shows how compelling drug use becomes. A human, like the rat, is willing to lose all to get their fix.

BTW- the question for all of you to consider is not whether pot should be legal, it is the structure of the laws governing the legalization. You'll find they actually don't deliver on what you imagine you will be free to do. Big Marijuana is *exactly* following the business model of big tobacco with some Monsanto thrown in. Plus, they target kids to ensure the next generation of profits.

 

Inevitable degradation is not the essence of drug use, or any of your business when it comes to another person, and not the explanation I asked for.

I want you to explain how one who provides what another person demands is victimizing the consumer.