Alternate Drug Policies

[VijchtiDoodah]

Right. Interesting subject.

The black market for drugs is thriving. It's doing so well, in fact, that most people in the U.S. can purchase a variety of illicit drugs by calling any number of drug dealers for local deliveries. Criminal organizations have become wealthy and powerful enough to influence governments through bribes, threats, and assassinations.

Despite it's illegality, some 20 million Americans older than 12 (about 8% of that population) have used illicit drugs within the past month and more than 50% report having used illicit drugs at least once in their life (data from NSDUH reports).

And in recent news, the Latin American Commission on Drugs and Democracy, as reported by former presidents of Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico, states that current drug polices are ineffective and harmful to both the democratic system and public safety.

Should the current drug policy in the Americas be replaced with something better? Why or why not? If you don't live in the Americas, have your country's unique drug laws succeeded or failed?

[N. Escalona]

Taxing drug consumption is pretty much the best way to create those black markets. I would support legalizing marijuana and possibly other drugs, but then the government would tax them. The War on Drugs has been a failure, a money hole for three decades. I think using marijuana and other psychoactives is an absurdly terrible decision, but it cannot be illegal because it is unenforceable. Yet given the current socialist climate here it cannot be legal either because it would be taxed, making the problem worse. For any other Christians out there, using these drugs for non-medical reasons is a serious evil.

FYI I have never used any drug other than prescription medication and alcohol.

[jettlarue]

Taxing drug consumption is pretty much the best way to create those black markets.

Why is it that I cannot find home brewed alcohol or home grown tobacco in my town although if I wanted to find just about any major drug(excluding psychedelics for the most part) is just a phone call away at any time, day or night.

I think that hospitals should carry some of the most dangerous drugs(heroin, cocaine, amphetamines) and only give them to people on an "addict" list. This way people who just want to get fucked up can't go. Either way most people could get it(there friend who is an "addict"), who already could get it, but the people who don't associate with that crowd and want to be somebody else will have to really try to get it. Although again probably not terribly hard, but it keeps it away from spur of the moment thinkers I guess. The money is costs to produce these drugs are dirt cheap, and in saying that I believe that the drugs be provided free. Addicts will steal if desperate enough, its kindof like if you needed insulin to live because your diabetic, wouldn't you steal to live? The money costs are so much less that the price of hundreds of thousands in prison or jail. And I think prevention programs of these substances and rehab centers(paid by taxes) would be great.

Marijuana and psychedelics should be legal(the same sense of how salvia divornium is classified now), sold as how tobacco is; gas stations, smoke shops. No driving, not sold to if underage. Shouldn't affect how you care for children.

For any other Christians out there, using these drugs for non-medical reasons is a serious evil.

Could you please cite a reference, I've never heard of that.

[VijchtiDoodah]

Taxing drug consumption is pretty much the best way to create those black markets.

Why is it that I cannot find home brewed alcohol or home grown tobacco in my town although if I wanted to find just about any major drug(excluding psychedelics for the most part) is just a phone call away at any time, day or night.

Jettlarue brings up a good point. Legalization and taxation are proven ways of nearly eliminating the black market, as evidenced by the repeal of the Prohibition. Some have brought up the point that the social effects and lost productivity due to indulgence in alcohol outweigh the costs of prohibition, but in reality Prohibition fosters the greater social evils of violence and organized crime whereas legalization seeks to mitigate those problems (though they admittedly exist in other forms).

At greater stake than loss of revenue due to prohibition is a loss of personal freedom to do as one pleases. A person should have the freedom to do what they want with the space between their ears, even if it is potentially unhealthy. In the same manner, we currently have the freedom to do what we please with rest of our bodies by exercising the right to eat greasy fast food that is in many ways much more damaging to a person's health than certain drugs. You wouldn't ban greasy foods because certain people cannot control themselves and bring harm to their bodies in the same way that you shouldn't ban drugs, extreme sports, or the wracking heartbreak of love.

For any other Christians out there, using these drugs for non-medical reasons is a serious evil.

Could you please cite a reference, I've never heard of that.

It prohibits sorcery, which was linked to witchcraft and therefore Satan, and sorcery included creating or imbibing drugs and potions. The idea was that potions (other than alcohol, which is a bit more complex) were used in communion with evil spirits and were therefore themselves evil. Although at that point almost no Christian had ever experienced the God-inducing (entheogenic) powers of many drugs available today (DMT, LSD, psilocybin, and mescaline, for example) and their ignorance shows.

One might make an argument that the Bible states that you should always prevent harm from your body and remain sober as much as possible, but in light of traditional Christian beliefs about alcohol consumption (that it's perfectly fine in moderation), all other drugs that are relatively harmless and allow you to remain relatively sober should be permissible. Unless you're one of several Protestant sects that view all drug use, including alcohol (excepting special circumstances in a subset of these sects), as sinful, but they represent a minority opinion.

Jettlarue, you may want to find sources for your hospital idea. At least if you're arguing from an financial point of view. I doubt it would be a trivial cost to treat those patients and the data should be readily available since there are already treatment centers in operation in several countries.