Legalising all drugs - your views?

[simmy]

I think the argument against is pretty obvious, however, the argument for is pretty interesting.

Should a governing body be allowed to tell people what it can and cannot do with their bodies?

Surely, it would save a lot of police money by allowing drugs to be filtered in legally.

It is fair to say that anyone who wants to take heroin for example is already doing so, but is committing crimes to fund it. Should the Government then give heroin away for free? So they know that its pure and can conduct a needle exchange etc. Heroin is fairly cheap to produce anyway.

Its an interesting topic. My standpoint is that they should not be legalised as the simple ecomonics say that as soon as it is legalised (or given away for free), then the supply and the demand for all drugs, but most worringly, Class A drugs will go up. Surely one thing that sets the civilised world apart from the developing world is the funds and ability to keeps things such as guns and drugs illegal.

Discuss

[age_master]

lets not forget that the Government would tax it and make money from that

[simmy]

So they should if you ask me.

[C_C]

Drugs should be legal and sold by the government to those who use it. However, the utmost priority is educating the world about the potential pitfalls of harder drugs like cocaine/heroin/crystal meth etc. instead of hyperventilating about benign drugs like pot,acid,payote etc.

[benchmark00]

Drugs that are detrimental to ones health or state of mind should not be leaglised full stop.

This includes recreational cannabis use, acid and any other drug.

The last thing we need is an extra burden on our all ready clogged up health system.

[Pratters]

Who cares. Those who want get the drugs they need any way. To not loose vote banks governments well never legalise drugs though they do know that restrictions mean encouragement.

[benchmark00]

Originally Posted by Pratyush

Who cares. Those who want get the drugs they need any way. To not loose vote banks governments well never legalise drugs though they do know that restrictions mean encouragement.

I read that 3 times and i still cant understand it properly.

[Dasa]

Originally Posted by benchmark00

I read that 3 times and i still cant understand it properly.

Governments won't legalise drugs because of the voter backlash, despite knowing that restrictions can encourage drug use (I don't agree with the last part though).

I can see the benefit in legalising drugs...for one thing, the purity of the product is guaranteed and it can be a regulated industry.

[Cloete]

Originally Posted by C_C

Drugs should be legal and sold by the government to those who use it. However, the utmost priority is educating the world about the potential pitfalls of harder drugs like cocaine/heroin/crystal meth etc. instead of hyperventilating about benign drugs like pot,acid,payote etc.

Do you realise how harmful pot can be?

It's only lately that the massive link between schizophrenia and cannabis use has been found.

[Robertinho]

No. It alters people's perception and ability to process information, as well as removing inhibitions and the like, it's too much of a health hazard to not only the users but the public. I can't see any benefits coming from legalising all drugs...

[bugssy]

Originally Posted by age_master

lets not forget that the Government would tax it and make money from that

the govt will allow anyt hing to happen as long as they benfit from it.. hence taxing taxes etc...................

[Burpey]

Originally Posted by Dasa

I can see the benefit in legalising drugs...for one thing, the purity of the product is guaranteed and it can be a regulated industry.

I think there would still be stuff on the street that won't be regulated and 'pure'

One reason it's important to keep it illegal is the impression it makes on children. I think we would all agree drug abuse is a horrible thing, and making it illegal makes children realise it's the wrong thing to do. Also, I can't see the government being able to regulate it successfully.

[Dasa]

Originally Posted by burkey_1988

I think there would still be stuff on the street that won't be regulated and 'pure'

One reason it's important to keep it illegal is the impression it makes on children. I think we would all agree drug abuse is a horrible thing, and making it illegal makes children realise it's the wrong thing to do. Also, I can't see the government being able to regulate it successfully.

I don't know...if drugs were legal presumably corporations would step in and be able to manufacture them at a fraction of what it costs now, so I doubt there would be a significant street industry as it wouldn't be viable. Regarding your second point, couldn't you also make a similar argument for cigarettes and alcohol?

[C_C]

Originally Posted by Cloete

Do you realise how harmful pot can be?

It's only lately that the massive link between schizophrenia and cannabis use has been found.

No there is very little corroborrative evidence about schizophrenia and cannabis.
Infact, India is one of the heaviest users of cannabis and i hardly found a schizophrenic in there.
What the research has shown is a slightly bigger predisposition of schizophrenics to try pot. Not that pot causes schizophrenia.
Infact, pot doesnt even have a 10th of the drawbacks as alcohol has. So long as alcohol is legal, pot should be. Same with psychadellic drugs like payote/acid. For none of them are addictive or have long term consequence with moderated usage.
For people arguing along health lines, i would like them to actively argue in favour of banning alcohol before they even consider speaking out against pot.

[FaaipDeOiad]

This is a difficult issue for me. Usually I fall on the libertarian side of all such debates, but I can't really bring myself to support the full legalisation of drugs that are both extremely addictive and extremely hazardous (like heroin, for example).

I definately fall on the decriminalisation side of the fence with drugs in general, though. Even without choosing to legalise drugs, the idea of jailing someone for simply possessing and personally using a drug seems quite absurd to me, especially with drugs that involve a serious chemical addiction. Drugs addicts are sick, they aren't criminals.

And obviously, as far as pot goes, it's quite silly to make it illegal. Even if you wish to argue that it has a negative impact health-wise, only an idiot would suggest that it is any more severe than the health risks posed by cigarettes or alcohol, or that the negative social impact of marijuana is any worse than that of alcohol. The reasons for making marijuana illegal in the first place were bogus, and there is no reason to continue today.