Which drugs do you think should be legal for personal use?

[Earth]

All of the above. I would like to see all drugs become legal.

[Earth]

I'd like to see the drinking age lowered to 18.

[Earth]

The people that are always for making HARD drugs legal are the very people who use them.

That's not true. I don't use hard drugs, but I don't want them to remain illegal. I don't want people going to prison for what should be a personal choice.

[Earth]

Natl healthcare and legalization of hard drugs = Train wreck waiting to happen.

Well, we won't know if drug legalization is a train wreck or not until it's implemented, and the chances are mighty slim for it to occur.

...
Iam talking about illegal psychoactive drugs LSD, X, Meth, Mushrooms ... you know the deal.

These drugs shouldn't be legal for sale, and there are many valid reasons for that.
...

Since we are trying to have a mature conversation about this, what are these valid reasons? It's easy to simply say drugs are bad, and leave it at that, but it doesn't do your argument any justice.

Drugs being illegal only creates more criminals, by criminalizing the act of buying, selling, and possession. The prisons are full of non violent convicts that under a system of complete legalization wouldn't be in there. By keeping hard drugs, and even soft drugs illegal, the black market booms, and organized crime is making a killing by having a monopoly on the drug trade. Legalizing drugs would take away the power of these cartels, and gangs because if it's legal, prices would drop because of competition.

People, if they were inclined to buy, now could be able to make that choice themselves, without the threat of incarceration. By ending the war on drugs, the government could now tax the business, and possibly use that budget to fund a better rehabilitation program for addicts, or anything else they see fit now that money is not funneled into this pointless war.

If an objection is made that now even kids could buy drugs, well, it only stands to reason that there be a legal age that one must reach to buy, similar to alcohol, or tobacco. It's sad that the situation now, teens have such an easy time buying marijuana or harder drugs (the illegal ones), but have a tougher time buying alcohol. The legal, regulated drug is tougher to acquire.

[Earth]

"Ignorance shouldn't be forgiven. It makes the ignorant person feel like they aren't

ignorant"

The only Ignorance here is the folks who think hard drugs should be sold to people like
candy.

I'm sorry, no one said drugs should be sold like candy. The point is people will always want to do drugs, no matter the law, so it should be legal for people, if that's what they decide. You have to drop this thinly veiled notion that only drug users would argue for legalization, or that pro-legalization people want to create ice cream truck drug shops.

While illegal drugs may yield some medical benefits for certain patients, there are a lot of other factors to consider. Most illegal drugs are illegal due to their severe side effects to the body. Generally they are documented to cause brain damage, heart problems, and other physical and mental diseases. Many of these drugs are also known to
cause addictions, as well.

So then why the massive discrepancy between hard drugs that are illegal, and hard drugs
such as alcohol, and tobacco? The point being, that drugs are not illegal because of their physical risk, they're illegal because of the perceived social risk. The risk to culture, and morality. Many anti-drug laws in america were created because of a fictitious threat of foreigners, and the black population. Heroin, more specifically, smoking opium was banned in 1875 because of an asian scare. Marijuana in 1937 under the Harrison tax act. They made these drugs illegal because of the high use by blacks, and mexicans. Not simply because they're a health hazard.

I've already said I favor making marijuana legal ( waste of money fighting that war), but not the other stuff.

There's no difference between a "war on marijuana", and a "war on drugs", they're both apart of the same ill conceived fight.

It is ridiculous to assume that by making these types of drugs legal that would somehow stop crime.   How in the hell are you going to stop crime by just making the drugs legal?

Why do you these cartels, and street gangs wage war? Because of the power that illegal drugs let them have. By making drugs illegal, these gangs now resort to violence to keep their place in the trade strong. And they can afford to buy all the weapons they need because of the high price of drugs. It's a never ending cycle. They buy drugs from suppliers cheaply, and in order to remain dominant, they sell the drugs at a higher price, raking in the money to fund their operation even more.

By making drugs legal, any number of legal businesses could be created, and that would drive the price down remarkably, effecting these cartels and gangs. The reason the mafia became so large and powerful was because of the money they made by supplying alcohol in the era of prohibition. By making alcohol illegal, these criminals didn't mind, they created, and shipped in alcohol, and they made millions. When they legalized alcohol again  in 1933, the average business could now create alcohol legally, and the mob lost their control over the alcohol supply. The same would be true for drugs. That is, if america is willing to try.

They would still be for sale, which means somebody has to have money to buy them. Do you really think the addict will be able to afford the heavily taxed and priced hard drugs now?

Is alcohol so heavily taxed that people can't afford it? No. Drugs would not be as heavily taxed, either. The demand for them would be too high. The addict now has trouble affording drugs, which leads to crime in order to fill their addiction. By legalizing it, the addict doesn't have to worry about being arrested, and neither does the average citizen.

In
theory would you put cartels out of business.. Yea maybe.  But the new front would now be on our home turf as it relates Crime and healthcare for these people. This is what most pro- drug  people like you, guys don't understand.  We all agree that drugs are harmful to the body right?    Why make this stuff legal to the public knowing the  effects, and sure you can bring up Tobacco and Alcohol " what about them" - you are messing the point.

What is the point we're missing? Why don't you address that point about alcohol and drugs?
Alcohol is also dangerous to the body, yet it's legal. It's a double standard. No one is saying drugs are harmless, or even mixing the effects as though it's all the same, but it's no use using billions of dollars to fight an unsuccessful war.

If it's about health care, ending the war on drugs would free up billions of dollar each year. The government could then use those funds more responsibly, for whatever the reason, health care, education, infrastructure, social security, etc.

I hate the drug debate because it always turns into a name calling feast.  The other side will never respect the conservative view point.  The stupid thing is that I've already said I would make Marijuana legal if I had my way.

I respect the liberal view point, but I strongly disagree with it for the reasons I stated. 75% of current politicians agree with me on this for what its worth.  Think about who's in the room with you before saying my view is Ignorance.

To be fair, I haven't called you names, I've been keeping my argument civil. There's no respect to give to the conservative view on drugs, because the conservative view is what got us into this mess we're in currently. I respect your opinion, but I don't see anything helpful about continuing down this road. Politicians have let us down time and time again regarding drugs.

[Earth]

I guess that just about sums it up.

Jesus Christ. This just tells me you haven't thought out your position. You don't even try to refute my points.

[Earth]

Where have you refuted the points I bring up? All you've said in this thread is "I don't agree" without backing up anything. Simply repeating it isn't an actual discussion.

My "typical leftist" view is shared also by the right, Libertarians specifically. If you like to avoid arguments I'm wondering why you're on a political forum.

[Earth]

No, you can do anything you want with your body in this country. We do have Laws + regulations, and  if the libertarianism in you thinks that a better America means free reign, then you are sadly on the wrong side of reality.

What you are advocating is pure lunacy. Making hard extreme drugs legal would cause more problems in the long run, then worrying about saving a few pennies on some drug war you think is useless.

Some of you have such a liberal stance that I don't really know how to debate you without laughing

You can't be serious?   

You can finally stop playing the victim, and saying we're ganging up on you. Take this bullshít elsewhere. You can say this all you like, but you never post evidence to back up your claims.

Like I have asked before how will society care for and pay for the attendant social costs of increased drug use, including family disintegration and child neglect?

First off, do you have evidence that says drug use will dramatically skyrocket? Society in either case, will not have to pay for "family disintegration" or child neglect anymore than the current situation. More to the point, who's paying for these ills now?

Right now, a major misperception in the legalization debate is being driven by the perception that the costs of solving the drug problem in America are far too high, which is a myth. 

Evidence for it being a myth?

Another misperception is that it’s the fact they are illegal is what drives the crime in poor inner city communities.   Let’s talk about the economics... The 1# question that has to be asked is who will sell drugs? The government? Private companies?   Because I have heard different answers, although some of you here seem to be advocating an "open market" type of setup - to where we would basically dump the drug laws, and whoever is dealing would just deal.  Ok... how does that solve the addicts need to have more cash to support a habit?

Then do us a favor, and clear up these "misconceptions" about drug use, and economics. Post some evidence.

As I've said before, by making drugs legal, regular businesses, even individual people could now sell drugs without the threat of punishment. I never said this would solve the addict's dilemma. With drugs being illegal now, the addict runs a greater risk of turning to crime to buy his drugs because of the high price. By making it legal, the price of drugs would drop, because of the creation of legal sellers (which would probably be regulated by government). Therefore, the addict now might not have to resort to anything criminal.

I’m sure just because drugs are made legal to buy or use the dealers aren’t just going to sell them for peanuts.  The drug cartails would still be in business, so really you would solve nothing on that front ( it would be like big oil part 2 ).

The drug cartels would have to drop their prices if more people were involved in selling drugs once they are legal. If there's an influx of any item that was once prohibited, prices automatically drop. This takes away the cartels power, because they no longer hold a monopoly over the trade.

Now, you say that by dumping our war on drugs it could free up huge sums of money that could be better spent on rehab centers and drug education?   If that’s the ideal, it’s foolish to think that by cutting the money spent on the drug war would be enough to pay for the huge increase of users and high crime rates that would soon follow after.

It's not foolish at all considering in 1999 alone, 30 Billion dollars were wasted in the war on drugs. That money could be used in a better way, from free clinics, to rehab centers, to education, anything. Once again, you've provided nothing that says there would be a "huge increase in users" or a higher crime rate.

It’s simply doesn’t add up to enough because you are not considering  Higher crime, higher health insurance  rates( if using our current system)  which leads me to my next question, but I want somebody to explain whose going to be in charge of the selling first.

Explain the higher crime scenario. If drugs become legal, less people go to prison because it's no longer a criminal offense, addicts could now afford what they need because of it's availability. Why are you mixing in health insurance when that is not based on anything related to the drug war? See above for the part on selling.

[Earth]

It makes no sense that ecstasy would be cut with a more expensive drug like coke. Drugs are usually cut with very cheap over the counter drugs, or fillers like baking soda to increase the amount.   

[Earth]

Secularist  are mostly people who are well educated and will be well off.  They don't care about regular people who may have less education, and be more prone to ill effects of secular lifestyles. 

Such as?

...The same ones making the case for drugs are the same ones who advocated  putting children on mind controlling substances...

You can't be serious.

[Earth]

I think it's official, we're dealing with a troll.

[Earth]

I think it's official, we're dealing with a troll.

No you're not.  I'm going to be alot more forcefull in defending the Conservative point of view on this and don't try the "troll" label tactic with me.   Your ideals are secular its that simple.

I'm not "trying" anything, you've made it patently clear that you don't know what you're talking about. Post after post, you offer nothing in the way of evidence when confronted, and you keep knocking down straw men you've built, and claim it's the "opposing" argument. You also pick and choose posts that are directed squarely at you, ignoring many of them, probably because you can't refute them.

By the way, you're a 'secularist' too. You watch television, listen to secular music, go to secular schools. There's nothing that sets you apart from the people you're trying to take the moral high ground on, except that when you're confronted with a well thought out argument, you just repeat yourself and say it's "relative". You also cheaply keep playing the victim.

[Earth]

Went back and reviewed all of your replies and you haven't posted and plan or numbers of why we should make hard drugs legal other then... "People should be able to do what they want"

Do you know why? Because my argument doesn't rely on statements like "The facts show...", or "Once the evidence is in". If I reference concrete evidence in order to further my argument, I'll provide links and citations, not silly phrases like the ones you've used.

My argument is hardly based on hedonism, if you've read what I've written, you'll see my point is the way things are working currently, with drugs being illegal, too many people are going to prison for what should be a personal choice. My argument is not about letting everyone do anything they want, it's about the very real consequences of out dated laws.

Sorry to bust your bubble, but right now I own a pretty fast car.  1993 mustang cobra 5.0 5 speed with some nice mods done and it runs 11.5's in the 1/4. I would love to take my car and get on the highway and just bang through the gears until I reach 130MPH without getting a ticket, but guess what.... I CAN'T!!

Comparing no speed limit to freedom to use drugs is cheap. By driving any which you like you endanger other people's lives. By ingesting or inhaling a drug, a person is only responsible for themselves. Maybe you can't grasp this distinction.

You keep saying I’ve not posted any facts, yet the same is true of you.  It's playing on the ideal that everything in this country should be free and no limits.  My main simple argument for drugs is:  (and please write it down, so I want hear you say I have no stance other than just hot air)   legalizing dangerous drugs will surely lead to increased use and abuse – a trend that could pose problems as severe or worse than those created by the drug war you wish to dismiss. 

The difference between our arguments is I don't get bogged down in silly phrases, or simply saying "The evidence". If need be, I'll provide statistics, about chemistry, the economics of the war on drugs, health effects, etc, but I won't simply bring up the idea of evidence without actually backing up my argument.

By misrepresenting, rather dishonestly, my argument as being about "everything being free" it's very hard to take you seriously. I've never once characterized your argument as anything, the only adjective I've used is "conservative". I would appreciate you showing me the same sense of civility as I show you.

As for your second statement, you could believe legalizing drugs would lead to an increase in use, but we wouldn't know until we actually try. Reform will only go so far, unless the actual root of the problem is sorted. Until then, this plague (yes, plague) will continue to exist.

One of you said before “There is no correlation between drug use and societal failure” Yes there is The black community. I remember how the crack wave in the 1980s pretty much dismantled black poor communities.

Meaning exactly what, that inner city blacks are only in the trouble their in because of drugs? On top of their vicious addiction, they have to now put up with being arrested for possession or resorting to dealing, which is also a big problem, combined with addiction. Even the lack of an affordable rehabilitation program is another giant negative. We're at this point because you're not considering the myriad problems, many of which have to do with drug's legal status. 

Your standard reply is going to be:  Well if the drugs were legal there wouldn't have been a problem.   Ok, but you've never explained how your ideal of making drugs legal would help.

No, you're misunderstanding what I've been saying. My point has always been that by simply having drugs be illegal, we are adding to the problem, not that simple legalization would fix the black community's problems. I've explained how making drugs legal helps, it's in this thread.

Other then "licensed dealers" would sell drugs    As a half black American I can't help but ask  Why do I want the Gov and their "licensed dealers" selling drugs in my already drug riddled community? We are lucky if one of ours is able to make it in school and past gangs, but now Uncle Sam wants dealers selling right up the street like some ABC Store.   Please explain this part?

Who said "licensed dealers"? I didn't. I said if drugs were to become legal, anyone could now sell without the threat of imprisonment. A person could now make a legitimate business out of growing marijuana, or producing other drugs.

(I've gone over the post maximum, part II below)

[Earth]

Let’s talk about some stats on availability:

The percentage of high school seniors reporting they could very easily obtain these drugs. (2007)

Marijuana 83%

Cocaine  47%

Crack 38%




meth 25%

Herion 29%

-According to Bureau of Justice Statistics

This is telling you what % of teens say they can gain access to these drugs.  Here again you’ve never explained should teenagers be able to use drugs under your ideal?
 There’s an age limit for beer and tobacco should we also have one for hard drugs if made legal? The numbers are telling because add your “free society” and I guess access would be in the 90% range of most hard drugs right?

I've said before, a sensible way of legislating drugs is to create a similar age system that we now use for alcohol. Because drugs can be legal, it doesn't mean we let kids buy them.

These numbers are important in a significant way, but not because it supports your argument. It's significant because it reveals the very important point that people, no matter what the law, will still want to use drugs.

Once again you rely on ad hominem crap to cover over your lack of a sound argument. How could any of us possibly know the percentage of access in "my free society" if it's never been implimented, or even argued for?

Like I’ve pointed out you have never gave a clear plan of how to go about this, other than flower power  talk and looking for me to oppose, so you and the gang can team up on my view because  you serious backing on this site.  It’s not a knock on anybody, but let’s face it, my view isn’t in the popular. I don’t really mind it because I’m standing for what I believe in. Enough of my jabber  ... let’s get back to more argument.

You know, I was once kissed by a chimpanzee, she was a very cool. Stop playing the victim and focus, thanks.

Another one of my points is on jobs and the workforce and how making drugs legal would hurt those in the lower paying occupations.   Some more interesting stats that back up my claim.
USEAGEThe Most prevalent is in food preparation jobs_  17.4%
Construction and extraction jobs _ 15%
-According to the US dept of health services-
The lowest oddly enough was protective services

This highlights what I mentioned… the cooks and single mom working at the local food joint will be more affected/ tested for use of drugs then any white collier type job that a highly educated college kid working at a firm never has to worry about.   The construction jobs ( and trust me when I say this, they don’t ing play if you test +) I know many people who have been walked to the gate after failing drug tests.  How does this tie to our debate?  Simple you advocate that we should let people be free to do what they feel and drugs should be up to the individual to decide.

Show me where I said people should do "what the feel", as if I expect peace and love to rain down if legalization becomes reality.

You added almost nothing of worth by including labor in this talk. It's just another distraction. Legalization doesn't mean labor will become lax, or suffer. What person in their right mind goes to work high? Even alcohol, while being legal, doesn't mean that white and blue collar workers show up to their jobs drunk. Some do, and they'll have to answer for that. It's irrelevant to the discussion.

Well just because you make drugs legal the construction company isn’t going to throw safety away for your ideals of a “free society”.

Good, because I don't expect companies to stop drug testing even if it were legal. They go overboard, especially in the service sector, but I don't expect them to change. Moving on.

I once worked at a Basf plant and they are very strict and for good reason.   I agree with you that our war on drugs is a total mess and needs  that big “R” word, but making hard dangerous drugs legal will not be the solution you want.   In grade school we were taught that theres a reaction to every action – cause and effect.  I wish you would think about the effects of making hard drugs acceptable to the public.  This is America and it’s not a utopia of free ideals, theres rules, regulations and limits.  Government shouldn’t violate your rights, but they should look after the public’s best interests. You may disagree, but I’m a strong believer in good Government.  There’s no need to dismiss my views at trollage because you disagree on my views.

I don't expect drug legalization to be a solution, only to a certain number of problems that plague this country. Now you're condescending enough that it's funny.