If the world had drugs legal.

what would u see the world as if all drugs were legal? (weed, crack, cocain, metheidmy)

i could see the world crazy. people would just steel from people. the world would be poor because they would be spending all of thier money on drugs.

what would u see the world as if all drugs were legal? (weed, crack, cocain, metheidmy)

i could see the world crazy. people would just steel from people. the world would be poor because they would be spending all of thier money on drugs.

iam2green

what would u see the world as if all drugs were legal? (weed, crack, cocain, metheidmy)

i could see the world crazy. people would just steel from people. the world would be poor because they would be spending all of thier money on drugs.

iam2green

If all drugs were legal, prices would plummet; the government would reap tons of revenue from taxing their legal, regulated sale; people who are addicted wouldn't have to steal tons of money just to get their next hit; and people wouldn't have to worry about getting thrown in jail just because they happen to be in possession of some drug.

But, of course, that's far too positive an outcome for it to ever be considered by politicians.

If all drugs were legal, prices would plummet; the government would reap tons of taxes from their legal, regulated sale; people who are addicted wouldn't have to steal tons of money just to get their next hit; and people wouldn't have to worry about getting thrown in jail just because they happen to be in possession of some drug.

But, of course, that's far too positive an outcome for it to ever be considered by politicians.

GabuEx

they'd rather spend taxpayers money throwing them in an overpopulated jail.

they'd rather spend taxpayers money throwing them in an overpopulated jail.links136

Of course, because as we all know, banning things completely eliminates their use off the face of the planet. Just look at Prohibition.

I think anyone who's ever met real life junkies wouldn't really want to see an open market and falling prices of heroin.jimmyjammer69

Anyone who really wants to get their hands on heroin is perfectly able to do so today; making it legal would just bring it above ground and make it easier for those people both to get help and not to turn to crime. I'm a firm believer in the idea, evidence in favor of which is received from the Rat Park experiment, that drug use is a symptom, not a problem unto itself, and that the root problem is a life within which people feel they need drugs to escape. Making drugs illegal helps nothing.

The law was made subconsciously for the interests of rebels.

If drugs were legal, they'd be boring like cigarettes. Though the human race would probably be insanely stupid by the end of the century because of all the brain cells they would have lost. Street dealers would lose their customers. There would be a higher annual murder count because of the increased number of people taking mentally influential drugs, causing them to kill without use of their own free will...

The law was made subconsciously for the interests of rebels.

If drugs were legal, they'd be boring like cigarettes. Though the human race would probably be insanely stupid by the end of the century because of all the brain cells they would have lost. Street dealers would lose their customers. There would be a higher annual murder count because of the increased number of people taking mentally influential drugs, causing them to kill without use of their own free will...

garathe_den

the number of people wouldn't increasee. Its actually likely to have the death toll go down without all the drug deals.

I think anyone who's ever met real life junkies wouldn't really want to see an open market and falling prices of heroin.jimmyjammer69

The law was made subconsciously for the interests of rebels.

If drugs were legal, they'd be boring like cigarettes. Though the human race would probably be insanely stupid by the end of the century because of all the brain cells they would have lost. Street dealers would lose their customers. There would be a higher annual murder count because of the increased number of people taking mentally influential drugs, causing them to kill without use of their own free will...

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]I think anyone who's ever met real life junkies wouldn't really want to see an open market and falling prices of heroin.GabuEx

Anyone who really wants to get their hands on heroin is perfectly able to do so today; making it legal would just bring it above ground and make it easier for those people both to get help and not to turn to crime.

I really don't think that's true, people tend not to want to wade through the deluge, given the choice. creating a legal and open market would mean allowing sellers to create a desire that very often currently isn't there. jimmyjammer69

If heroin were legalized, it would be strictly regulated just as cigarettes are today. There is no evidence whatsoever in favor of the idea that making heroin legal would suddenly make everyone go out and become a heroin junkie.

People turn to heroin because of the state of their lives, and that will be the case regardless of whether heroin is legal or illegal. You want to lessen drug use, then improve the lives of those who use drugs; making the drug illegal just makes those people's lives even worse, all while empowering organized crime, too.

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]I really don't think that's true, people tend not to want to wade through the deluge, given the choice. creating a legal and open market would mean allowing sellers to create a desire that very often currently isn't there. GabuEx

If heroin were legalized, it would be strictly regulated just as cigarettes are today. There is no evidence whatsoever in favor of the idea that making heroin legal would suddenly make everyone go out and become a heroin junkie.

People turn to heroin because of the state of their lives, and that will be the case regardless of whether heroin is legal or illegal. You want to lessen drug use, then improve the lives of those who use drugs; making the drug illegal just makes those people's lives even worse, all while empowering organized crime, too.

So you don't believe that the banning of nicotine would cut the number of smokers either? People turn to heroin for many reasons but ione of the key reasons is that it's available. Cutting off that availability should be the first priority in preventing drug abuse. Improving the lives of drug users really just means sanctioning their addiction. Don't know about you, but I don't want a nation of victims.jimmyjammer69

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]I really don't think that's true, people tend not to want to wade through the deluge, given the choice. creating a legal and open market would mean allowing sellers to create a desire that very often currently isn't there. jimmyjammer69

If heroin were legalized, it would be strictly regulated just as cigarettes are today. There is no evidence whatsoever in favor of the idea that making heroin legal would suddenly make everyone go out and become a heroin junkie.

People turn to heroin because of the state of their lives, and that will be the case regardless of whether heroin is legal or illegal. You want to lessen drug use, then improve the lives of those who use drugs; making the drug illegal just makes those people's lives even worse, all while empowering organized crime, too.

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]So you don't believe that the banning of nicotine would cut the number of smokers either? People turn to heroin for many reasons but ione of the key reasons is that it's available. Cutting off that availability should be the first priority in preventing drug abuse. Improving the lives of drug users really just means sanctioning their addiction. Don't know about you, but I don't want a nation of victims.foxhound_fox

Maybe you'd like to answer the question then: do you think that nicotine addiction would increase or decrease if tobacco was banned? We're on the way to an outright smoking ban in all public places in much of Europe, and something tells me Philip Morris and the BAT aren't going to emerge as seedy street corner peddlers if tobacco is completely banned.

So you don't believe that the banning of nicotine would cut the number of smokers either?jimmyjammer69

Not substantially. Same as Prohibition - there's obviously no hard numbers on the subject, but really, anyone who wanted to get a drink during Prohibition could get one. And thank you for bringing up cigarettes, as well - by your logic, since nicotine is addictive and legal, shouldn't we have a nation of smokers on our hands? Because I'm not exactly seeing a huge problem there. In fact, now that cigarettes are commonplace and everyone is aware of the harm of smoking by this time, cigarette use has gone way down - and all without banning a single cigarette.

People turn to heroin for many reasons but ione of the key reasons is that it's available. Cutting off that availability should be the first priority in preventing drug abuse. Improving the lives of drug users really just means sanctioning their addiction. Don't know about you, but I don't want a nation of victims.jimmyjammer69

How do you propose cutting off availability? Making it illegal? It already is illegal. Making it more illegal? Well, that's what the War on Drugs has been all about, and here we are, with billions upon billions of dollars wasted, tons of people in prison just for using drugs, and no improvement of the root situation in sight whatsoever. The War on Drugs has been, bar none, the biggest sham of the entire 20th century. It was brought in for the noblest of intentions, but it has been a complete and utter failure in every possible regard, just like Prohibition. It's really about time we tried something new.

Maybe you'd like to answer the question then: do you think that nicotine addiction would increase or decrease if tobacco was banned? We're on the way to an outright smoking ban in all public places in much of Europe, and something tells me Philip Morris and the BAT aren't going to emerge as seedy street corner peddlers if tobacco is completely banned.jimmyjammer69

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]So you don't believe that the banning of nicotine would cut the number of smokers either?GabuEx

Not substantially. Same as Prohibition - there's obviously no hard numbers on the subject, but really, anyone who wanted to get a drink during Prohibition could get one. And thank you for bringing up cigarettes, as well - by your logic, since nicotine is addictive and legal, shouldn't we have a nation of smokers on our hands? Because I'm not exactly seeing a huge problem there. In fact, now that cigarettes are commonplace and everyone is aware of the harm of smoking by this time, cigarette use has gone way down - and all without banning a single cigarette.

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]People turn to heroin for many reasons but ione of the key reasons is that it's available. Cutting off that availability should be the first priority in preventing drug abuse. Improving the lives of drug users really just means sanctioning their addiction. Don't know about you, but I don't want a nation of victims.GabuEx

How do you propose cutting off availability? Making it illegal? It already is illegal. Making it more illegal? Well, that's what the War on Drugs has been all about, and here we are, with billions upon billions of dollars wasted, tons of people in prison just for using drugs, and no improvement of the root situation in sight whatsoever. The War on Drugs has been, bar none, the biggest sham of the entire 20th century. It was brought in for the noblest of intentions, but it has been a complete and utter failure in every possible regard. It's really about time we tried something new.

I can't really comment on how the war on drugs was conducted, without reading up a bit but as far as I'm aware, a lot of it involved private contracted militia, which is kind of laughable. You're right that I can't offer an easy solution, but a sincere approach to eradication at source or even leaving things in their current state are infinitely better than legalization.jimmyjammer69

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]I can't really comment on how the war on drugs was conducted, without reading up a bit but as far as I'm aware, a lot of it involved private contracted militia, which is kind of laughable. You're right that I can't offer an easy solution, but a sincere approach to eradication at source or even leaving things in their current state are infinitely better than legalization.foxhound_fox

But cocaine and opium can hardly be seen as acceptable cash crops for the US to trade, can they?

But cocaine and opium can hardly be seen as acceptable cash crops for the US to trade, can they?jimmyjammer69

If heroin were legalized, it would be strictly regulated just as cigarettes are today. There is no evidence whatsoever in favor of the idea that making heroin legal would suddenly make everyone go out and become a heroin junkie.

People turn to heroin because of the state of their lives, and that will be the case regardless of whether heroin is legal or illegal. You want to lessen drug use, then improve the lives of those who use drugs; making the drug illegal just makes those people's lives even worse, all while empowering organized crime, too.

GabuEx

You logic leaves much to be desired. I must admit, I would find it hard to take what you've said seriously with a straight face.

I am not here to debate whether or not making such a drug legal would turn everyone into addicts. We both know that this would never be the case. There are two sides to every coin and this is where your argument persists. Both sides are clearly defined but as we can clearly see, there is something in between. An area of grey so to speak. I speak of the undecided. Those kids who have a lapse in judgement for only a moment. Legalizing heroin would greatly increase attainability. You cannot deny the simple logic here. I assure you, you would think twice about leaving a loaded gun in front of a child. I fail to see the difference in this case. All it would take is a careless adult and a child. I am not going so far as to say that this is an impossibility as of right now, it surely isn't.

You logic leaves much to be desired. I must admit, I would find it hard to take what you've said seriously with a straight face.

I am not here to debate whether or not making such a drug legal would turn everyone into addicts. We both know that this would never be the case. There are two sides to every coin and this is where your argument persists. Both sides are clearly defined but as we can clearly see, there is something in between. An area of grey so to speak. I speak of the undecided. Those kids who have a lapse in judgement for only a moment. Legalizing heroin would greatly increase attainability. You cannot deny the simple logic here. I assure you, you would think twice about leaving a loaded gun in front of a child. I fail to see the difference in this case. All it would take is a careless adult and a child. I am not going so far as to say that this is an impossibility as of right now, it surely isn't.

TheWakingArmy

Sure, I would think twice about leaving a loaded gun in front of a child.

I would not make guns illegal as a consequence.

What you're arguing is in favor of the strict regulation of drugs like heroin, just like cigarettes are regulated today. Not their full-out illegality. Making heroin legal does not exactly necessitate handing it out to kids at carnivals.

[QUOTE="TheWakingArmy"]

You logic leaves much to be desired. I must admit, I would find it hard to take what you've said seriously with a straight face.

I am not here to debate whether or not making such a drug legal would turn everyone into addicts. We both know that this would never be the case. There are two sides to every coin and this is where your argument persists. Both sides are clearly defined but as we can clearly see, there is something in between. An area of grey so to speak. I speak of the undecided. Those kids who have a lapse in judgement for only a moment. Legalizing heroin would greatly increase attainability. You cannot deny the simple logic here. I assure you, you would think twice about leaving a loaded gun in front of a child. I fail to see the difference in this case. All it would take is a careless adult and a child. I am not going so far as to say that this is an impossibility as of right now, it surely isn't.

GabuEx

Sure, I would think twice about leaving a loaded gun in front of a child.

I would not make guns illegal as a consequence.

What you're arguing is in favor of the strict regulation of drugs like heroin, just like cigarettes are regulated today. Not their full-out illegality. Making heroin legal does not exactly necessitate handing it out to kids at carnivals.

You are dancing around the point. My point solely rests on the degree of attainablity. If you saw a kid smoking a cigarette, you would not think twice. It is really rather common. This is the nature of your argument, you go so far as to say that this kind of legalization is alright. Permittting heroin to the extent that cigattes are. This is where I find great flaw in your argument.

You are dancing around the point. My point solely rests on the degree of attainablity. If you saw a kid smoking a cigarette, you would not think twice. It is really rather common. This is the nature of your argument, you go so far as to say that this kind of legalization is alright. Permittting heroin to the extent that cigattes are. This is where I find great flaw in your argument. TheWakingArmy

You are dancing around the point. My point solely rests on the degree of attainablity. If you saw a kid smoking a cigarette, you would not think twice. It is really rather common. This is the nature of your argument, you go so far as to say that this kind of legalization is alright. Permittting heroin to the extent that cigattes are. This is where I find great flaw in your argument.

TheWakingArmy

I really don't know what you're saying here. Of course, if you treated heroin like cigarettes, there would inevitably be some kids who get their hands on it. But here's the thing: nicotine is as addictive as either heroin or cocaine. That is a hard, scientific fact. By your logic, therefore, we should be banning cigarettes to keep them away from kids.

The fact of the matter is this, however: when minors get a cigarette in that manner, they are already doing so illegally. Kids are not obtaining cigarettes legally any more than people are obtaining heroin legally. Needless to say, this all comes back to the question of whether making the acquisition of a drug illegal really impedes someone from getting it who wants it.

Besides that, as well, the benefits of legalizing heroin are numerous:

- Heroin use will become above-ground, making it much less problematic for addicts to find help.

- Heroin prices will plummet, making addicts not need to resort to crime just to get their next fix.

- Large amounts of government revenue will be gleaned from the regulated sale of heroin.

- Heroin users will no longer be pointlessly put in jail, an act that renders their life only more messed up and makes them more likely to continue their heroin use.

- A major pillar of funding for both terrorism and organized crime - the drug trade - will completely vanish overnight.

You're welcome to assert that we should keep heroin 100% illegal because if we don't then people will get their hands on it and we'll have all these addicts on our hands, but the facts don't weigh that out. Amsterdam has legalized marijuana, and one might expect their rates to be huge as a result, right? Wrong: marijuana use in Amsterdam is estimated to be half of that in America, where marijuana is 100% illegal.

Meanwhile, in Switzerland, a study was done in which the government prescribed heroin to long-time addicts to monitor the effects of such a thing. They found a number of interesting facts:

1. Over the course of the study, the health of the addicts improved dramatically.

2. Heroin itself appeared to cause few problems when administered in a controlled fashion and in hygenic conditions.

3. The addicts' cravings were not insatiable; when offered nearly unlimited amounts of heroin, the addicts naturally regulated their doses.

The study was so successful at improving the situation, in fact, that it swayed people who were previously opponents to approve a broadening of the program.

If you want to bring weight to your argument that we should continue to ban all drugs and that that will produce the best outcome for society, you're really going to have to start coming up with facts and figures of your own - an argument cannot be sustained indefinitely purely on unsubstantiated assertions.

...an argument cannot be sustained indefinitely purely on unsubstantiated assertions.GabuEx

[QUOTE="TheWakingArmy"]

You are dancing around the point. My point solely rests on the degree of attainablity. If you saw a kid smoking a cigarette, you would not think twice. It is really rather common. This is the nature of your argument, you go so far as to say that this kind of legalization is alright. Permittting heroin to the extent that cigattes are. This is where I find great flaw in your argument.

GabuEx

I really don't know what you're saying here. Of course, if you treated heroin like cigarettes, there would inevitably be some kids who get their hands on it. But here's the thing: nicotine is as addictive as either heroin or cocaine. That is a hard, scientific fact. By your logic, therefore, we should be banning cigarettes to keep them away from kids.

The fact of the matter is this, however: when minors get a cigarette in that manner, they are already doing so illegally. Kids are not obtaining cigarettes legally any more than people are obtaining heroin legally. Needless to say, this all comes back to the question of whether making the acquisition of a drug illegal really impedes someone from getting it who wants it.

Besides that, as well, the benefits of legalizing heroin are numerous:

- Heroin use will become above-ground, making it much less problematic for addicts to find help.

- Heroin prices will plummet, making addicts not need to resort to crime just to get their next fix.

- Large amounts of government revenue will be gleaned from the regulated sale of heroin.

- Heroin users will no longer be pointlessly put in jail, an act that renders their life only more messed up and makes them more likely to continue their heroin use.

- A major pillar of funding for both terrorism and organized crime - the drug trade - will completely vanish overnight.

You're welcome to assert that we should keep heroin 100% illegal because if we don't then people will get their hands on it and we'll have all these addicts on our hands, but the facts don't weigh that out. Amsterdam has legalized marijuana, and one might expect their rates to be huge as a result, right? Wrong: marijuana use in Amsterdam is estimated to be half of that in America, where marijuana is 100% illegal.

Meanwhile, in Switzerland, a study was done in which the government prescribed heroin to long-time addicts to monitor the effects of such a thing. They found a number of interesting facts:

1. Over the course of the study, the health of the addicts improved dramatically.

2. Heroin itself appeared to cause few problems when administered in a controlled fashion and in hygenic conditions.

3. The addicts' cravings were not insatiable; when offered nearly unlimited amounts of heroin, the addicts naturally regulated their doses.

The study was so successful at improving the situation, in fact, that it swayed people who were previously opponents to approve a broadening of the program.

If you want to bring weight to your argument that we should continue to ban all drugs and that that will produce the best outcome for society, you're really going to have to start coming up with facts and figures of your own - an argument cannot be sustained indefinitely purely on unsubstantiated assertions.

And you say you're not worthy of the Pianist award.

And you say you're not worthy of the Pianist award.aliblabla2007

[QUOTE="TheWakingArmy"]

You are dancing around the point. My point solely rests on the degree of attainablity. If you saw a kid smoking a cigarette, you would not think twice. It is really rather common. This is the nature of your argument, you go so far as to say that this kind of legalization is alright. Permittting heroin to the extent that cigattes are. This is where I find great flaw in your argument.

GabuEx

I really don't know what you're saying here. Of course, if you treated heroin like cigarettes, there would inevitably be some kids who get their hands on it. But here's the thing: nicotine is as addictive as either heroin or cocaine. That is a hard, scientific fact. By your logic, therefore, we should be banning cigarettes to keep them away from kids.

The fact of the matter is this, however: when minors get a cigarette in that manner, they are already doing so illegally. Kids are not obtaining cigarettes legally any more than people are obtaining heroin legally. Needless to say, this all comes back to the question of whether making the acquisition of a drug illegal really impedes someone from getting it who wants it.

Besides that, as well, the benefits of legalizing heroin are numerous:

- Heroin use will become above-ground, making it much less problematic for addicts to find help.

- Heroin prices will plummet, making addicts not need to resort to crime just to get their next fix.

- Large amounts of government revenue will be gleaned from the regulated sale of heroin.

- Heroin users will no longer be pointlessly put in jail, an act that renders their life only more messed up and makes them more likely to continue their heroin use.

- A major pillar of funding for both terrorism and organized crime - the drug trade - will completely vanish overnight.

You're welcome to assert that we should keep heroin 100% illegal because if we don't then people will get their hands on it and we'll have all these addicts on our hands, but the facts don't weigh that out. Amsterdam has legalized marijuana, and one might expect their rates to be huge as a result, right? Wrong: marijuana use in Amsterdam is estimated to be half of that in America, where marijuana is 100% illegal.

Meanwhile, in Switzerland, a study was done in which the government prescribed heroin to long-time addicts to monitor the effects of such a thing. They found a number of interesting facts:

1. Over the course of the study, the health of the addicts improved dramatically.

2. Heroin itself appeared to cause few problems when administered in a controlled fashion and in hygenic conditions.

3. The addicts' cravings were not insatiable; when offered nearly unlimited amounts of heroin, the addicts naturally regulated their doses.

The study was so successful at improving the situation, in fact, that it swayed people who were previously opponents to approve a broadening of the program.

If you want to bring weight to your argument that we should continue to ban all drugs and that that will produce the best outcome for society, you're really going to have to start coming up with facts and figures of your own - an argument cannot be sustained indefinitely purely on unsubstantiated assertions.

Well, of course making drugs illegal impedes somebody who wants it from getting it. Back to the comparison with murder: do you think that there would be no significant rise in the number of killings if murder was made legal? I think that nicotine is an excellent case in point (thank you for bringing that one up ). Close to 25% of American males are smokers - I think most who've tried it will agree it's a pretty pointless but highly addictive and costly habit. And why did most smokers start? Because smoking was sanctioned by the state, becauseit was legal and available.

The benefits of legalizing heroin (I can't believe I even have to argue this with somebody) are illusiory in the real world.

1) The idea that being above ground means that heroin addicts will get help more easliy

Do you know how few addicts ever recover from their addictions? Rehab is a joke, only being effective in a tiny number of cases after the spending of enormous amounts of money. The other "help" is the doling out of methadone, which is just as addictive as heroin.

2) Heroin prices will plummet, so addicts will no longer need to resort to crime to feed their habit

This is true, but it will also increase the spectrum of users. It will make smack addiction a realistic possibility for everyone. If you've met junkies before, you'll probably agree that a nation full of addicts wouldn't be so far off the zombie invasion posters used to posts about so often.

3) Addicts self-regulate their dose. Build up of tolerance is universal.

Higher doses are required by the user, who, contrary to the impression given in your argument, is not a responsible physician, carefully medicating the ills of society, but a pathetic will-less animal. In short, the study proves that the state could successfully keep heroin addicts supplied with heroin, but what does that achieve? Who is supposed to pay for the heroin you propose flogging to them, because believe me, heroin addicts aren't going to work to support their habit.

It's no solution at all,it's the last, desperately inhumaine move of a suicidal capitalist economy.

[QUOTE="aliblabla2007"]And you say you're not worthy of the Pianist award.BiancaDK

If the drugs were legalized some of its "prestige" (if you wanna cll it that) will be gone; because a thing that makes people do drugs is that it's something forbidden (not the only factor for sure).

So if they are legalized we would deffinetely have higher crime rates, not necessarily out of being poor as the TC said, but if you are "high" on drugs you don't control yourself and you might start having criminal behaviour.