US thinking of drug legalisation talks... opinions?

[grumps]

http://bitterqueen.typepad.com/friends_of_ours/2012/03/us-agrees-to-drug-legalization-talks.html

I don't want this to be a post advocating drugs, as my opinion on that is simple- they ruin lives- however I would like to hear opinions on the possible change of tact insinuated in this story. Drug barons hold enough influence nowadays to influence international politics, drugs fund terrorism and the industry which revolves around them is fraught with violence and linked inextricably to many other illegal industries. Would legalisation tackle this, or do you think it would make the problem worse??

[Mollys_mum]

An interesting thread, Tony. I don't have any answers as the USA is, as Europe, experiencing a lot of 'constitutional' problems at the moment.

Have you tried looking beyond the main stream news for an answer?

[grumps]

An interesting thread, Tony. I don't have any answers as the USA is, as Europe, experiencing a lot of 'constitutional' problems at the moment.

Have you tried looking beyond the main stream news for an answer?

It's not so much an answer i'm looking for, more just opinions. There are huge ramifications if it goes ahead, and these will touch upon every country in the world in one way or another. There has been a war on drugs for a hundred years, and it has been a losing battle from day one, but in principle I believe the war on drugs was right... however, principles alone have done nothing to stem the tide. I do think prohibition makes the problem worse(look at how much money mobsters made during the prohibition era in the 20's with alcohol), but I also see legalisation as a bad idea. I'm feeling very conflicting about the idea.

[CourtJester]

I have never seen a problem with drugs take them if you wish, I don't think the government should have the right to say if someone can or cant take a substance. They will ruin life's if they are legal or not. The ammount of money we and other countrys put into stopping drugs is retarded.

For Example I know a lot of people who do Coke, Marijuana and many other Illegal substances but they are perfectly reasonable people have well paid jobs, never been on the radar of the law so what's the problem. they re caught with a drug and the proceeding months the government SPENDS MY MONEY on arresting them and putting them in prison, it's half asses imo.

[grumps]

I have never seen a problem with drugs take them if you wish, I don't think the government should have the right to say if someone can or cant take a substance. They will ruin life's if they are legal or not. The ammount of money we and other countrys put into stopping drugs is retarded.

For Example I know a lot of people who do Coke, Marijuana and many other Illegal substances but they are perfectly reasonable people have well paid jobs, never been on the radar of the law so what's the problem. they re caught with a drug and the proceeding months the government SPENDS MY MONEY on arresting them and putting them in prison, it's half asses imo.

I must say I also know plenty of people who do drugs who are perfectly decent and reasonable, but my big concern is that if the US were to go ahead with legalisation, then "product" which would normally be designated for the states would naturally end up re-routed for europe at a significantly reduced price. Which, in turn would make these drugs even more appealing, readily available-and more importantly affordable to school children.

[CourtJester]

I must say I also know plenty of people who do drugs who are perfectly decent and reasonable, but my big concern is that if the US were to go ahead with legalisation, then "product" which would normally be designated for the states would naturally end up re-routed for europe at a significantly reduced price. Which, in turn would make these drugs even more appealing, readily available-and more importantly affordable to school children.

That is a concern, Children should not take drugs, but they should not smoke or drink either but they get hold of it some way or another, the only way would be to control drugs much more tightly, I mean holland seems to manage it if USA cant I'm worried .

[grumps]

That is a concern, Children should not take drugs, but they should not smoke or drink either but they get hold of it some way or another, the only way would be to control drugs much more tightly, I mean holland seems to manage it if USA cant I'm worried .

But Holland has, for a long time, had a much more tolerant attitude so it's ingrained in the population. In the USA and the rest of Europe the attitude towards drugs has been less tolerant, and this gives us a different mental attitude to drugs. Will people suddenly be the proverbial "kid in a sweet shop"?

[Removed #5]

Tony, I'm with you here; conflicting emotions all the way. Living on the US / Mexico border we hear more about this than we want.

Pros to legalization:

• 
  
  
• taxing authority over the substances involved.
  
  
• control over them regarding purity / quality.
  
  
• ability to provide non-criminal aid to the addicted who also market.
  
  

Seriously, I think the first two are a pipe dream. Does anyone in the government seriously think that the cartels would pay the taxes or allow the control? I'm not so naíve as to believe that they'd settle for what, I think, would be pennies on the dollar. The difference between the existing "open market" and a controlled market would, imo, dissuade the cartels from any coöperation.

Should we decriminalize small amounts of some drugs for personal use? As we know, and you mentioned, 100 years ago we went through the "experiment" with prohibition with all of its ramifications. Decriminalization and control of alcohol hasn't reduced the number of alcohol dependent people, just insured that what they drank wasn't going to kill them because of "quality". The virtual decriminalization of marijuana in some of our states has only reduced the impact on our courts / jails - John Doe who's using doesn't need to spend 2 - 20 years behind bars, 6 months to a year in rehab is a realistic alternative, imo. Save the prisons for those who manufacture and distribute - the guy who brings in a truck load is a prime candidate for long term incarceration. As long as there is significant money to be made by controlling the flow and distribution, I don't think any amount of "legalization" is going to have significant impact.

Calderón has impacted the drug traffic in Mexico - regrettably he's had to use the federal forces and has caused bloodshed on a scale similar to what we saw during prohibition.

The solution, as I see it, is education. We've seen the impact that education has had on tobacco use over the past 50 years. (I'm pulling these numbers out of the air, but I think they're reasonable) In the 50's and 60's, I believe it was estimated that better than 75% of the adult population of the US used tobacco in some form, I believe that's been reduced to something in the area of 20% today. If we're really serious about ending the drug use then we're going to have to go about it by impacting the end user in a non-felonious manner. Small amounts - possibly beyond personal use - bring huge fines. Involuntary rehab for the addicted user on his second or third appearance in court for, for example, assault and theft - as we do now for the alcohol addicted.

Okay, you asked for opinions and you've gotten some of mine and I've gone on way too long .... Next ....

[grumps]

Tony, I'm with you here; conflicting emotions all the way. Living on the US / Mexico border we hear more about this than we want.

Pros to legalization:

• 
  
  
• taxing authority over the substances involved.
  
  
• control over them regarding purity / quality.
  
  
• ability to provide non-criminal aid to the addicted who also market.
  
  

Seriously, I think the first two are a pipe dream. Does anyone in the government seriously think that the cartels would pay the taxes or allow the control? I'm not so naíve as to believe that they'd settle for what, I think, would be pennies on the dollar. The difference between the existing "open market" and a controlled market would, imo, dissuade the cartels from any coöperation.

Should we decriminalize small amounts of some drugs for personal use? As we know, and you mentioned, 100 years ago we went through the "experiment" with prohibition with all of its ramifications. Decriminalization and control of alcohol hasn't reduced the number of alcohol dependent people, just insured that what they drank wasn't going to kill them because of "quality". The virtual decriminalization of marijuana in some of our states has only reduced the impact on our courts / jails - John Doe who's using doesn't need to spend 2 - 20 years behind bars, 6 months to a year in rehab is a realistic alternative, imo. Save the prisons for those who manufacture and distribute - the guy who brings in a truck load is a prime candidate for long term incarceration. As long as there is significant money to be made by controlling the flow and distribution, I don't think any amount of "legalization" is going to have significant impact.

Calderón has impacted the drug traffic in Mexico - regrettably he's had to use the federal forces and has caused bloodshed on a scale similar to what we saw during prohibition.

The solution, as I see it, is education. We've seen the impact that education has had on tobacco use over the past 50 years. (I'm pulling these numbers out of the air, but I think they're reasonable) In the 50's and 60's, I believe it was estimated that better than 75% of the adult population of the US used tobacco in some form, I believe that's been reduced to something in the area of 20% today. If we're really serious about ending the drug use then we're going to have to go about it by impacting the end user in a non-felonious manner. Small amounts - possibly beyond personal use - bring huge fines. Involuntary rehab for the addicted user on his second or third appearance in court for, for example, assault and theft - as we do now for the alcohol addicted.

Okay, you asked for opinions and you've gotten some of mine and I've gone on way too long .... Next ....

Very interesting opinion too. Gives me plenty of food for thought and must say, a very intelligent line of thought.

[grumps]

Also have to say, in regards to educating people, realistically the government should have started that a generation before thinking of legalisation. We now face the possibility that at least one generation would have been given mixed signals by both the government and their parents. A bit like an advert that says "DRUGS ARE BAD- GET THEM HERE"

[Removed #5]

Also have to say, in regards to educating people, realistically the government should have started that a generation before thinking of legalisation. We now face the possibility that at least one generation would have been given mixed signals by both the government and their parents. A bit like an advert that says "DRUGS ARE BAD- GET THEM HERE"

I don't think that's too much unlike what we saw with tobacco. My parents generation smoked, almost a matter of course.

I think we knew from the mid 60's that smoking was "bad for us" but many of ignored (and continue to ignore) the warnings presented by the government and mother nature.

I keep hearing the argument that "a little isn't going to hurt you," normally in reference to marijuana and cocaine. But a bad batch of cocaine can kill you just as dead as using isopropyl alcohol did during prohibition.

Maybe there are people who can indulge in "just one" but it seems that with many of the addictive substances, "just one" an almost impossible task.

I'm curious, how does the Netherlands handle this? I know that some of our illegal substances are legal there ... are there no problems??

[Elyse]

In my opinion, drugs shouldn't be legalized. That might encourage MORE people to do them, which in turn could affect families being torn apart by drugs. (It's happened in my family; my mother's side is practically unapproachable because of drug problems they have.) And that's never pretty.

I keep hearing the argument that "a little isn't going to hurt you," normally in reference to marijuana and cocaine.

You usually hear that statement from people who are already addicts, and they don't realize it, or from drug dealers trying to sell their 'product'.

A little does hurt you, psychologically, and you can (and most are) addicted within a 'drug session' (don't know what they're called, never done drugs and I never will.). Once you're addicted, it's incredibly hard to stop.

If drugs were legalized, just imagine the havoc. Instead of saying, "I'm just going out to have a few drinks", they can say "I'm just heading out to snort some coke."

Personally, I think the REAL reason why they want to legalize drugs? So they can tax them. I know that, in Canada, tobacco in cigarettes is legal. The government has no interest in stopping the sales of tobacco, even though thousands of people die from complications per year, because they make so much money off of the taxes from tobacco sales. I believe it's similar with drugs - more money rolling in from taxes. And, with the US's current debt problem, they'll be doing anything to scape in some money.

While, it's true that drug-dealers and people who do drugs will probably not pay taxes, the government can get them in other ways. Taking away their personal possessions (car, home, etc.), throwing them in jail, etc.

[BlueWolf]

Personally, in my opinion and from my view this whole drug issue is being exaggerated A LOT in the US. There are so many more important issues in the world to solve and all that seems to be talked about is this 'war on drugs'. I believe many have a very different view on drugs. Soft drugs are allowed here in the Netherlands, and have been for a very long time. I've got many (mostly US) people ask me about it and they just couldn't understand how not half of the population in the Netherlands is addicted to drugs, which really surprises me as that's apparently the view on drugs, some stuff that makes you instant addict. The truth is: In my life I've never met a heavy drug addict. There are probably you use it once in a while, but I wouldn't even realise it, they're still the same nice and kind people they've always been.

Drugs are mostly a non issue. What's a much more important issue is smoking- and alcoholic addicts. There are MUCH more of those and these are actually dangerous. Taking drinking for example. It's not only dangerous (in huge amounts) for yourself, you also pose a huge risk to the society. So many people die in car accidents caused by drunk people, it's not even funny. People who use drug? Well, they generally silently sit in a corner minding their own business in their own world and do not pose any risk at all to others. So that's why I am much more for a smoking and strong alcoholic drinks-ban and consider drugs an issue for later.

I also think this does not really falls into the scope of a husky forum to be honest.

[grumps]

Personally, in my opinion and from my view this whole drug issue is being exaggerated A LOT in the US. There are so many more important issues in the world to solve and all that seems to be talked about is this 'war on drugs'. I believe many have a very different view on drugs. Soft drugs are allowed here in the Netherlands, and have been for a very long time. I've got many (mostly US) people ask me about it and they just couldn't understand how not half of the population in the Netherlands is addicted to drugs, which really surprises me as that's apparently the view on drugs, some stuff that makes you instant addict. The truth is: In my life I've never met a heavy drug addict. There are probably you use it once in a while, but I wouldn't even realise it, they're still the same nice and kind people they've always been.

Drugs are mostly a non issue. What's a much more important issue is smoking- and alcoholic addicts. There are MUCH more of those and these are actually dangerous. Taking drinking for example. It's not only dangerous (in huge amounts) for yourself, you also pose a huge risk to the society. So many people die in car accidents caused by drunk people, it's not even funny. People who use drug? Well, they generally silently sit in a corner minding their own business in their own world and do not pose any risk at all to others. So that's why I am much more for a smoking and strong alcoholic drinks-ban and consider drugs an issue for later.

I also think this does not really falls into the scope of a husky forum to be honest.

Okay, I take your opinions on board but would like to say that I posted this in Off Topic- Newsroom, thinking that this was the section for me to post something like this. I am new here and as such would just like to get to know people and thought an intellectual discussion might help me know people better. Would I be right in thinking that Newsroom is for husky news and not just any news. Either way, I apologise, I certainly never meant to cause any friction.

[BlueWolf]

Okay, I take your opinions on board but would like to say that I posted this in Off Topic- Newsroom, thinking that this was the section for me to post something like this. I am new here and as such would just like to get to know people and thought an intellectual discussion might help me know people better. Would I be right in thinking that Newsroom is for husky news and not just any news. Either way, I apologise, I certainly never meant to cause any friction.

No worries. I'll let it stay here for the sake of a good discussion

[Arooroomom]

I have a friend who used to be very close with me. We were very good friends for a very long time. Marijuana is not a legal substance here in the US. Yet, her parents pretty much openly used it. As she got older she began to use it every now and then to relax, or have fun or whatever. Let me say she has a very addictive personality. She began using it more and more and then proceded to use other harder drugs. Now, years later she has been in rehab a few times (this last time will hopefully be the last.) She is a poster child for Marijuana being a gateway drug. Although, she has been smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol for the majority of the time too, probably before marijuana.

On the other hand I have friends who use (illegally) Marijuana for other purposes in their life (other than to have fun, or party, or escape) and they would never in their life use "hard" drugs.

Watching friends and family struggle with their own problems (my father is an alcoholic) I find the issue doesn't lie with the substance, but within the self control of the person using it. To me personally I feel that alcohol is much more damaging and dangerous than marijuana. And if we're after keeping unsafe and dangerous "drugs" out of the public hands... That's where I would start. But I'm also biased because of my father.

While I don't think marijuana is as harmful as the government wants us to think, making it readily available will only promote its use. I feel decriminalizing it would be the best route to take.