Viewing Thread:
"Legalisation"

No doubt many members and staffies of SR, no matter what their ages, have taken drugs. Recently, there's been an even bigger chance that marijuana will get legalised, with trials in London to not even bother arresting people caught possessing...and I remembered a talk on drugs we had in school, where a policeman asked us if we'd ever considered the possibility and consequences of all drugs being legal.

Would it be a bad thing?

My first instinct was no, and pretty much the whole class laughed at Ben and Joe who had their hands up to support the idea...but the more I think about it, the more sense it makes.

It's a radical idea, yes: legalizing ALL drugs, including those very addictive and very lethal ones, such as the aforementioned cocaine and heroin. I doubt it will ever happen in this country, and it would be a very controversial idea...but I'm already sold.

The war on drugs is not only being lost, it's being lost at an alarming cost. However, if the government (or any government, for that matter) decided to cut out the drug dealers, and actually sell these substances legally, it would first and foremost free up a lot of police time spent chasing up big time dealers. Sure, a black market would exist just like with any other product, but the business would be nowhere near as lucrative. As is done currently with cigarettes, taxes could be put on the prospective products and rather than soaking up money for funding work, it would actually MAKE money.

Without any competition, most traders in the drug business can mark up prices to such heights that addicts are forced to mug people on the streets, and break into houses in order to fund habits - I'm not saying that this will be totally eradicated, but drug-related street crime would surely go down. Of course, the drugs would only be sellable to over 18s (on the basis that by this age they are able to make an informed decision on whether or not they should take something that will probably start an addiction) with the exception of ones lower down the grade scale, such as dope, which would be put around the same level as cigarettes.

Naturally each container would have warning labels all over, even more than on cigarettes today. There would be no doubt in anybody's mind that, when buying a drug, they were running the risk of hallucinating and tripping (which could lead to them doing something they may not want to), getting addicted to the said drug and, in many cases, dying, be it from dehydration or an overdose. There would be labels on ecstacy boxes saying only to take one every how many hours, and to remember to drink lots of water...and the same with all the other types.

Another possibility would be creating the same sort of atmosphere that America has been building, by banning drug use anywhere outside of your (or a willing associate's) house. Of course, as a non-smoker, I would like to see smoking cigarettes in public place banned first and foremost, but if any/all drugs were legalised, this should prevent people being forced to breathe in cannabis smoke, and seeing people shoot up whilst they prepare to eat a meal. A license system would be brought in, much like the current rules and regulations for selling alcohol - only licensed stores and places could sell drugs, and any other place or person could be arrested just as they would be today, for dealing.

Of course, there is the hazard that a person could come out of their house stoned out of their mind, and do something terrible...but then, very few people do not take drugs because they simply aren't available - this problem would not be reduced, but many others would be. For instance, problems with injected drugs. Each heroin 'pack' would have a separate needle, only usable once, to stop the transferring of AIDS, and other such viruses. Another thing would be the trouble that you never know what is inside the tablet, or vial. When you pop a pill in a club, there could be all manner of dangerous chemicals that you didn't want to find in there...but if the stocks were controlled, everything would be as clean as it could be (given the nature of it).

There would be no advertising anywhere. Money could be spent on anti-drugs adverts like the recent 'doesn't smoke' campaign on TVs today.

I'm not saying this would be a perfect system, but I think it would be a damn fine one, better than the current one, anyhow. What are your thoughts on the subject of cannabis, or legalizing all drugs? I'd be glad to hear them.

Thanks for reading.

-El Blokey

Goatboy wrote:
> Heh
>
> At the end of the day, despite your high-brow pontificating and valid
> points - you go home and do as much as I do.
> I'm just not as troubled and filled with righteous fury.
>
> Now I'm off for a cigarette.

Sorry if this sounds personal, but why is it me thats doing the high brow pontificating and being filled with righteous fury just because I disagree with you ? Is it any better than going "yeah mate lets all agree to disagree" or something like that ? You're as dismissive of any points against what you think as I am.

I'm not troubled by it and I don't know why you think I'd be troubled by a group that wants to pay money to intake subtances that will harm them long term and may not contain what they think it does.

~~Belldandy~~

Belldandy wrote:
> I guess we're just destined to clash opinions on most things eh ? Ah
> well.....
---

And that's the way the world works and I wouldn't have it any other way.
And whilst I may find myself disagreeing with you, not in your opinions as I frequently agree but the manner in which you present them, that doesn't mean I don't enjoy your posts.

I have to be honest though, sometimes I just can't bring myself to trawl through one and will go read something about monkeyfights or boobs or something.

Goatboy wrote:
> Actually I'm not going to get into this one with you Bell, I like your
> posts and I consider you one of the more intelligent and interesting
> posters here.
>
> But, personally, I find your opinions to be absolute black and white
> and completey at the extreme of an example to prove your point, rather
> than willingly discuss in rational terms without resorting to
> knee-jerk fear tactics.
> Please, I'm not having a go here mate, honestly.

Fair enough, but why can't opinions be black and white ? Why is it considered almost trendy to have "grey" opinions which blur boundaries ? Why is it acceptable to break traditional morality on one issue - drugs - and not another ?

I'm 100% certain that users of this forum would completely blast any user advocating the legalisation of child pornography because our morality, values, decency e.t.c all say it's sick and wrong for inumerable reasons. Black and white opinion isn't it ? There's no possible grey area as the Police are now, rightly, prosecuting people accessing pseudo-child pornography. Technically, it could be argued that users of pseudo images (models of legal age but depicted as otherwise) aren't doing any harm as a model would be of legal age, but the images are displayed and used in such a manner as to suggest this is otherwise. It's wrong, and people deserve to be prosecuted for it, but technically if those taking part are all of legal age then no one is being harmed. It's still wrong though and it should remain that way. Why are "grey" opinions on drugs acceptable ?

Yes, I use extreme examples because whilst they may be extreme to us living safely in the UK, the places the examples are from aren't. Not one person in Mogadishu before it descended into civil war and warlord control probably though it would end like it did. If anything you could say your own examples are at the opposite of extreme, Amsterdam for example. May have legalized everything but it's got a bad reputation and it's main association is with drugs and the sex industry. Whatever else may be there that is the over riding image for most people. Sure, it attracts some people, but those it doesn't can never be measured.

The example of LA is poor, I think you'll find very few of the serious players involved in the drugs scene there give much attention to something like Cannabis, which is considered a middle class drug and doesn't have any aspect of 'coolness' to it. The whole problem of the drugs wars in America is they remained confined to the dealer areas, poor urban areas. If you had small battles breaking out amongst the white picket fences of middle America and the trendy areas of London then you'd see an end to them much faster.

I'm not being bullish on this, whatever you think, I just have an alternative point of view that says drugs are wrong, to damage, and are and should remain illegal, and no amount of claims it OK are going to change that. Rational approach ? I'm not the one supporting legalization, which isn't rational in itself.

I guess we're just destined to clash opinions on most things eh ? Ah well.....

~~Belldandy~~

Heh

At the end of the day, despite your high-brow pontificating and valid points - you go home and do as much as I do.
I'm just not as troubled and filled with righteous fury.

Now I'm off for a cigarette.

Goatboy wrote:
> Nice way to leap to extremes and polarise using scaremongering, I
> shall call you Daily Mail from now on
> Heh

Nope. In Mogadishu there is no government enforced law. Drug taking is widespread and accepted. Employment is around 5%, armed gangs control a majority of the area whilst the remaining is covered by the UN, which sits around it's compounds most of the day. Legal drug taking, or lack of drugs enforcement mean that by the afternoon a fair portion of the population is "drugged" and does very little for the rest of the day, repeating the cycle endlessly until the UN and everyone else finally gets the balls to do something.

> Prostitution and pornography could
> both fall under this kind of justification. Why should one thing be
> legalized because a group finds it acceptable ?
>
> I happen to genuinely be in favour of decriminilising both of those.
> Again, because nobody gets hurt.

100% Genius, not. Decriminalising either or both would say that as a society we find these acceptable. Both are crimes linked beyond doubt to orgnised crime both internationally and locally. Prostitution, whilst it indoubtedly does have some women who gain from it, massively exploits women of all ages. Legalization would not stop exploitation but drive it further underground where it would be even harder to prevent.

If you had kids, and these were made legal, would you want your daughter to come home one night and declare her chosen professon was prostitution ? I doubt it, but you're happy for other peoples children to do it ? Same goes for porn, where do you stop the law and make part of it illegal if you further legalize it ? Can anyone claim something is in bad taste if you want to go past the laws we have already ?

And if I'm Daily Mail, then you're the Daily Star, because thats how much I think of these points.

~~Belldandy~~

Actually I'm not going to get into this one with you Bell, I like your posts and I consider you one of the more intelligent and interesting posters here.

But, personally, I find your opinions to be absolute black and white and completey at the extreme of an example to prove your point, rather than willingly discuss in rational terms without resorting to knee-jerk fear tactics.
Please, I'm not having a go here mate, honestly.

But your example of Mogadishu is rubbish.
Amsterdamn has legalised prostitution and cannabis. That's hardly a warzone is it?
Unlike, say, East LA where drugs are illegal and are at the center of turf wars be dealers with numerous shooting per day.

And I see nothing wrong with legalising porno, we're one of the only countries in the world where hardcore porn is illegal. Yet I can go rent "Maniac Soldier 12" and watch numerous guttings etc of nubile young women.
Prostitution can only be made better through legalisation. It wouldn't be any more accesible just because it's legal.
Methadone is legal, yet you try and obtain it.

As far as I'm concerned, whatever is illegal is way easy to obtain anyway, and with it being illegal at least I know what I'm getting for what prices.

I actually agree with your principles, I just dont see the need to be so bullish and extreme in explaining your arguments.

Now I'm off to shoot smack and The Horse and do some crime.

Belldandy wrote:
Fact still remains that if I were to take too much of most
> drugs I'm dead, whereas alcohol means I'd feel terrible the next day
> but not dead.

You can die from alcohol poisoning. Not a week goes by I dont hear of some tool student that necked a bottle of Stoli and dies.

Drugs, prostitution, pornography, every
> single thing that some group wants legalizing lets do it, we can
> create one big Mogadishu out of the whole country.

Nice way to leap to extremes and polarise using scaremongering, I shall call you Daily Mail from now on
Heh


Prostitution and pornography could
> both fall under this kind of justification. Why should one thing be
> legalized because a group finds it acceptable ?

I happen to genuinely be in favour of decriminilising both of those. Again, because nobody gets hurt.

> How come a drug like alcohol that can do this to a person is legal
> whan a relatively harmless drug like Cannibis (okay so it causes brain
> damage in later life) is still illegal?
>
> I don't get it.

I do. Somewhere, back down in history, people decided alcohol was okay, that people could buy and sell as much as they wanted, that doing so would do know harm. So they did, and it's accepted now. Cannabis is harmless but causes brain damage ? Contradictory there isn't it ? Fact still remains that if I were to take too much of most drugs I'm dead, whereas alcohol means I'd feel terrible the next day but not dead.

Still, I'm beginning to see Ingenium Bartender's point of view. This country is going right down the drain anyway so why not hasten it on a bit and legalize everything ? Drugs, prostitution, pornography, every single thing that some group wants legalizing lets do it, we can create one big Mogadishu out of the whole country.

Seriously though, the lobby for legalizing drugs has this whole "were not harming anyone if were willing to use them" thing, why not apply that to other laws ? Prostitution and pornography could both fall under this kind of justification. Why should one thing be legalized because a group finds it acceptable ?

Interestingly, how many people here would want a shop selling drugs, or a drug dealer, living next to them or in the same street ? Y'know, if you're living on a nice new expensive estate do you want a drug shop next to the local shop ? I'm betting you don't. You'd want it somewhere out of the way, away from where YOU live. Same goes for things like prostitution, people would like to see them all in a big house, off the streets where they could be seen.

In much the same way there is "not me mate, someone else" attitude amongst users of soft drugs in which they believe the use of the drugs does no harm, it's always "the other kinds". Most drugs connect back to organised crime in some way, even though the links are well hidden. People are dying abroad trying to stop drugs which are in demand in countries like Britain. They die trying to stop the flow of drugs to developed countries, and now groups of people in these countries sit back and act like drugs are okay.

The exampe of alcohol is widely used, if you acknowledge that this and tobacco are already 2 legal drugs doing damage why on earth are you asking for another pile of harmful substances to be made freely available ??

Ultimately drugs will never be legalized and drug use will continue to remain illegal.

~~Belldandy~~

Sod it. Just legalise ALL substances.

It would be a lovely cleansing experience watching all the inherently stupid people in this country smoke, sniff and needle themselves into comas.

Then, when nthe country has recovered from all the burglaries, robberies, ram-raids and ransoming of innocent children to the feed drug addictions of the damned, we can all get along, the country having raised it's average IQ by no small amount.

Ros's Interesting fact #1

Did you know that your body can become so addicted to alcohol that you can if an addict stops drinking they may go into alcohol withdrawl and die. this is true of only one other drug (a prescription drug not used illegally). Even the most addictive illegal drugs will not kill you if withdraw from them suddenly.

How come a drug like alcohol that can do this to a person is legal whan a relatively harmless drug like Cannibis (okay so it causes brain damage in later life) is still illegal?

I don't get it.