Should Drugs be Illegal?

[SivaGanesha 2]

Quote

Saying that by legalizing and taxing a product the criminal element goes away is just not true, unless you don't tax it (or tax it at an absolute minimum) and make it available to all ages.

If you make something legal above a certain age, you tend to take organized crime out of the picture. It may still technically be a crime for a 21-year-old to provide it to a 17-year-old, but there is no longer a need for large scale organized crime to be involved.

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[SkyDekker 1,121]

Quote

If you make something legal above a certain age, you tend to take organized crime out of the picture.

My cigarette example above refutes that claim.

[regulator 0]

You are leaving a massive void when you use the word 'drugs'. I'd say keep heroin, cocaine, PCP, Ecstasy, Ketamine, GHB, and the rest of the 'hard drugs' completely illegal. However I say for sure legalize Marijuana. Its a plant that GOD created. No one has ever died from smoking too much weed. Make everything else illegal. You know how many people got arrested this year for killing someone behind the wheel while driving high? Yeah thats almost impossible to find because the number would be so low that it almost couldnt be tracked. Alcoholism is a much worse disease to have than to be a pothead. You should bring some clarification to the table with using a term so loose as 'drugs' so yeah lets get rid of all your precription medication as well because thats a drug too.

[billvon 2,380]

>However I say for sure legalize Marijuana. Its a plant that GOD created.

So is the coca plant.

> You should bring some clarification to the table with using a term so loose as
>'drugs' so yeah lets get rid of all your precription medication as well because
>thats a drug too.

?? In California, you can get a prescription for pot. Are you opposed to that?

[regulator 0]

Of course not. I told you before I am all for the legalization of marijuana...just not the more addicting of harder drugs.

[SivaGanesha 2]

Quote

Quote

If you make something legal above a certain age, you tend to take organized crime out of the picture.

My cigarette example above refutes that claim.

It is difficult to find a link from that site with much in the way of details.

However, from what I can tell it is mainly focused on evading taxes on cigarettes--not on evading age limitations--which is a different situation entirely. Where there is a tax it may be on a nationwide scale requiring organized crime to penetrate the restrictions--where there are merely age restrictions the restrictions can be violated on a one-on-one basis.

Also a number of articles on that site appeared to focus on the period in Germany right after reunification where there may have been unique economic factors in play--I'd want more information before being sure these factors would apply elsewhere.

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[SkyDekker 1,121]

There are many articles out there to find on this. It holds true in New York and it holds true in Ontario, just a some examples.

Would you suggest legalizing drugs, but not taxing them?

Secondly, at what age would you then find it appropriate to allow people to shoot heroin?

[regulator 0]

You may be right about the cocoa plant being a plant, but the proces it goes through is MAN made not GOD made. Once you cut and dry your buds you can smoke them right there. You can't cut down a coocoa plant and wrench it like a sponge and suddently cocaine drips out of it.

[billvon 2,380]

> Once you cut and dry your buds you can smoke them right there.

Butane lighters (even matches) are not GOD made they are MAN made. Controlled fire is one of those human inventions. Without fire, you'd have to chew them, and the result wouldn't be nearly as potent.

>You can't cut down a coocoa plant and wrench it like a sponge and
>suddently cocaine drips out of it.

Actually, you can; alkaloid cocaine is present in the leaf in concentrations up to about 1.5%. People chew coca leaves for that reason.

[regulator 0]

sounds like you have experience using this method!

[regulator 0]

Wouldnt be nearly as potent? Appearantly you never eaten weed brownies. Besides you are just nit picking me on some lame technicalities. So when lightning strikes a tree and it catches on fire thats man made as well?

[billvon 2,380]

>So when lightning strikes a tree and it catches on fire thats man made as well?

Nope! And when there's a landslide and a bunch of coca plants are crushed to a paste, that's not 'man made' either. It's still silly to call processed cocaine or smoked marijuana 'natural.'

[regulator 0]

Yeah I understand this but my point is that marijuana is WAY more natural than cocaine is. What exactly is YOUR point? When you figure that out let me know.

[billvon 2,380]

>Yeah I understand this but my point is that marijuana is WAY more
>natural than cocaine is.

They both occur in plants that grow both wild and in cultivation. They both have some effect when used without preparation, but are regularly prepared/processed to enhance their effect. They are extremely similar in that respect.

>What exactly is YOUR point?

That claiming "marijuana is natural so smoking it should be legal" is as silly as arguing that "apes in nature kill each other so murder should be legal."

Now, if your argument is that marijuana is much less addictive and much less toxic than cocaine, that would be a much better argument.

[regulator 0]

Allright how many people do you know that lose their minds and go out and rob banks to get money for weed? How many people do you know that have died from overdoses of weed? The fact is simple...cocaine, heroin...and the likes are drugs that greatly affect the way people think and reason. And they are greatly more addicting. Sure marijuana is addicting as well, but you simply dont hear about many people going out and murdering someone else over user amounts of weed. Sure if you're a dumbass and you traffic the shit in high quantities you are asking for it but I am referring to what most people have themselves and not dealers. And another thing...I have been watching Intervention on A&E for a few years now and I have seen lots of addictions...alcohol, meth, cocaine, heroin, gambling, but I have NEVER seen a single show about someone that was addicted to smoking weed.

So mr. smartypants put THAT in your pipe and smoke it!

[billvon 2,380]

>Allright how many people do you know that lose their minds and go out and
>rob banks to get money for weed?

A few, but far, far more turn to crime to support cocaine habits than marijuana habits.

> And they are greatly more addicting.

Agreed. And _that_ is a good argument for legalizing one over the other.

[regulator 0]

YAY!! Finally in agreement. I'll have to jot this one down as to how deep Billyvon will actually go during a debate...pretty damn deep!

[FreeflyChile 0]

Quote

Quote

I don't know much about the biology/chemistry of it, but is there a way similar to blood-alcohol level used with booze to tell how high someone is?

The police can run blood tests.

If I remember law school correctly, isn't there a constitutionality issue w/r/t blood tests in traffic stops? (Lawrocket, looking in your direction...)

[billvon 2,380]

> isn't there a constitutionality issue w/r/t blood tests in traffic stops?

At least in CA, when you get a driver's license, you have to sign a form agreeing to be tested when you're pulled over. It can be blood, urine or breath.

[Lastchance 0]

Not all drugs. I think that would be quite insane. But weed, hell yes. If you smoke it or not, I think that the majority of people would agree that pot smokers are not criminals because of it. Our fucked up system makes them criminals./

I may be getting old but I got to see all the cool bands.

[freefal 0]

Although the natural vs. man made argument was somewhat resolved above, would that also apply to plants like salvia or peyote (other the other legal cacti), mushrooms, or things like psychoactive toads, ayahuasca tea? Heck, even nutmeg is supposedly somewhat psychoactive when prepared correctly.

Should those be legal to? I personally think so. Partially because they are natural (it's kind of silly for a government to tell you that you can't have something that essentially "grows on trees") but also, and more importantly, because they are generally less toxic to the body than the "made made" substances like cocaine, heroine, PCP, etc. I think billvon makes a good point about the effects on the human body being more of an arguement than the "man made" vs, "natural" approach.

If we all lived in a village somewhere on a remote island and we knew that every time Bob ate a certain plant, he went nuts and started uncontrollably destroying things, then we might all agree that no one can eat that plant. If instead Bob just giggled a bunch, or stared off into space, or walked around in circles until he fell down, then we would probably laugh at him for being a waste of space, but since it didn't really hurt anyone else, we probably wouldn't make any rules about that plant.

In the end, it comes down to what the people think is acceptable. As the medival alchemist Paracelsus said, "All substances are poisons: there is none which is not a poison. The right dose differentiates a poison and a remedy."

"Ignorance is bliss" and "Patience is a virtue"... So if you're stupid and don't mind waiting around for a while, I guess you can have a pretty good life!

[billvon 2,380]

>because they are generally less toxic to the body than the
>"made made" substances like cocaine . . .

Cocaine isn't man made. It comes from the leaf of a plant. You just crush it and extract the cocaine.

[tbrown 26]

As far as personal posession and use go, yes. Sales should only be through strictly licensed - and taxed - outlets, with sever penalties for illegal sales. Drug related conduct offenses, whether DUIs, or any other kind of robbery, violent assault, theft, etc, should be prosecuted fully. Drugs do not excuse unacceptable behavior anymore than alcohol.

Owsley Stanley, the famous acid chemist wrote an interesting proposal at his website a few years back (do a search for "Bear"). He proposed a license for drug users. the license fees would then fund the education that would go with the license, as well as treatment for those drug users having problems and/or who want to stop. I think it's a basically sound idea.

Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !