Should drugs be illegal?

[PistolSteve]

It is a question I have fought with for some time - is the government right for making certain drugs illegal?

[PistolSteve]

1. For those who voted that drugs shouldn't be illegal at all....

....does that mean there shouldn't be prescriptions anymore? Just a question...

[sui generis]

6. see that's the beauty of making them all legal

you have to get a prescription from your doctor for crack, and that's not likely to happen.

So, 1. drugs are legal
and 2. you can't get get 'em unless it's a prescribed treatment for a disorder or illness.

:shrug: how weird is that?

[PistolSteve]

14. Well then that solves nothing - great, nothing changes nt

[uncle ray]

52. you don't need a prescription

for alcohol, for tobacco, for ibuprofen. who says legal would mean a prescription?

[sui generis]

82. mental exercise

for the most part snortable coke and speed won't kill ya like shooting it up or smoking it will.

So I say if you want to smoke meth or crack or shoot up, you need a prescription. Everything else, have at it, generally speaking.

The formulary IS dangerous; most pharma is the minimum effective dose with minimum side effects and complex interactions.

Recreational drugs that alter your perception of reality or reflexes for 12 hours at a time are not a good idea to sell on the shelf, but I'm not at all against making them available to responsible adults who are into that.

Here's the test for the naysayers: what if you could make a 100% non-addictive version of meth or crack? Would you then be willing to sell it over the counter?

It's another good mental exercise.

[PistolSteve]

2. I feel like #5 is the right answer, but I also feel like a hypocrit

Does anybody else feel that way? I mean, who am I to say that some drugs are OK, but other aren't. Is it based on addictiveness? How high you get? You can get nearly as high on prescription amphetamines as you can on meth. What about LSD that has never killed anyone (because of an overdose) and isn't addictive?

[Union Thug]

9. LSD is fine with me.

I believe that we should regulate drugs in the same way we regulate alcohol or tobacco.

You bring up a good question that I stumble with, too. What to do about crack and meth? My brother was eaten alive by meth, but there is part of me that has to acknowledge that the problems that came about from the addiction were made worse by the drug being illegal. Had he not found it necessary to deal with the underworld elements that supplied the drug, etc. many of his problems would have been easier to control and he would not have ended up living in a shack in the woods for ten years.

Good questions...

[PistolSteve]

17. Meth is so fucking horrible...

Seriously - that's why I can't ever see making it legal. People get SO addicted SO fast and it is so hard to get off if it. It wrecks their lives and their families lives.

My mother lives in Oregon and she says the crime there is unreal because of meth. Even if legal, they would still have to steal to afford it.

[High Plains]

38. Meth is so fucking horrible...that it's a Schedule II prescription drug

It's called Desoxyn and manufactured by Abbot Laboratories.

Legalize meth, criminalize criminality. Like with alcohol. We don't arrest people for drinking, but we do arrest them for drinking and driving or drinking and neglecting their kids...

[PistolSteve]

40. You've obviously never had a personal experience with 'street' meth

seriously - I haven't met one person whose life it hasn't screwed up

[Union Thug]

43. That's a good point. So, if meth were made legal and available

and manufactured in a clean, regulated way, should it be legal?

I don't know. This is one place where I continue to a waiver. My senses tell me that it would be better to legalize and control it through our public health/legal system, than to let the black market control it. It will always be available, so regulate and keep it clean. I guess. :-)

[High Plains]

53. I'm quite familiar with street meth, thank you.

I quit using it of my own volition some years ago. No one had to arrest and imprison me or throw me in some coerced treatment program. I just quit.

Meth can have deleterious effects, but it's not useful to overdramatize them. About 12 million people in the US have used meth, but only about 500,000 are currently using. I suspect a lot of people have short meth-using careers...

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

54. Is meth really that bad?

Isn't it just all drug hype? Is it more addicitive than cocaine? Pretty sure it isn't. Is it more dangerous? I don't think so either. So why is it a bigger problem?

Is it because "street" people use it, instead of rich people?

Probably.

[Quantess]

59. No, not at all. Meth IS worse than cocaine, and more addictive, too.

At least cocaine is derived from a plant, as opposed to meth, which is made from toxic, corrosive, household chemicals.

Have you seen pictures of what meth does to a person? Not to mention, it rots their brain and body from the inside out. Meth is no comparison to cocaine.

[porphyrian]

65. Um, cocaine rots the brain from the inside out, too. It depends on how much you do for how long.

As well as the quality, and your genetic predisposition. I'm not sure where you're getting your info.

[Quantess]

70. Trust me, I'm not espousing

the wonders of cocaine, by any means. Meth affects human bodies worse than any other drug, (IMHO, as I am not a drug counselor, or any sort of expert in any way).

These are some amazing photos. "The Faces of Meth"

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/photos/gallery.ssf?cgi-bin/view_gallery.cgi/olive/view_gallery.ata?g_id=2927

Cocaine is derived from the coca plant. Street cocaine, of course, is cut with fillers, some nastier than others. Cocaine has the capacity to ruin lives, but it's not as physically toxic as meth (that's my impression).

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

72. Prove it.

Because from what I've read, meth and cocaine are roughly the same in terms of addictiveness, and both less addictive than nicotine.

Your argument about cocaine being from a plant, and meth being synthetic is utterly meaningless. Strychnine comes from a plant, nutrasweet is a synthetic chemical.

Yes, I've seen "faces of meth," and that's my point. It doesn't prove anything. It's pseudoscience. It's just hype.

Every few years there's a "new" drug that the media freaks out about and some of the people fall for it.

[PistolSteve]

73. WOW - That is ignorance

Because you read some quack say cocaine/meth is less addictive than cigarette doesn't mean it's true.

I will guarantee it - that you have NEVER been exposed to either cocaine or meth. That no one you know has done it.

TRUST ME - I'VE TRIED ALL THREE - Nicotine isn't even REMOTELY close to cocaine or meth - not at all. You do meth once and you want it again right away.

People can control alcohol, marijuana, opium and other drugs. Meth they can not.

It disgusts me that you say it is just hype when you clearly have NO idea what you are talking about.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

74. Your quacks are better than my quacks, eh?

So you can quit smoking any time you want?

With that logic, shouldn't you try cocaine and meth for a comparison?

"People can control alcohol, marijuana, opium and other drugs. Meth they can not."

Given testimony in this thread (and outside sources, common sense, etc.) I'd have to say you're just making this up.

"you clearly have NO idea what you are talking about."

:rofl:

[PistolSteve]

75. Are you crazy?

I never said quitting smoking was easy - it is really hard - very hard.

But you clearly have no exposure to drugs. Quitting meth is near impossible once addicted - so many people end up right where they start.

Yes, people control alcohol, marijuana and opium. They do it all the time. Most people aren't addicted to alcohol, many marijuana smokers control it easily - in fact, many believe it isn't that addictive. Opium IS addictive, but many people are able to use it in moderation.

Nearly all Meth users up their dosages until the are addicted unless they quit right away.

You have no authority on this because you simply don't know what you're saying.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

80. Are you?

Because research show that meth addiciton recovery has just about the same recovery success as cocaine, heroin, tobacco, etc.

http://www.alternet.org/drugreporter/21275/

"You have no authority on this because you simply don't know what you're saying."

Frankly, Steve, I don't think you know what you're talking about. I suspect you saw some news story about meth, or something, and fell for the hype. Oh well.

[High Plains]

77. "You do meth once and you want it again right away."

That's true for some people. Those same people will want to do cocaine right away, too. They seem to have a genetic (?) susceptability to stimulants. But meth is more long-lasting than cocaine; you don't want to do more as soon as you do with cocaine.

But it's also not true for many other people. In fact, I suspect most meth users are not the stereotypical out-of-control tweakers you seem to know, but are people who are able to use the drug when they feel like it and have the self-control to not let it get on top of them.

"People can control alcohol, marijuana, opium, and other drugs." Well, I'm afraid you're creating false distinctions again. Have you never heard of alcoholics? Heroin addicts? Clearly, some drugs are more problematic for some people than others. In my case, I have to watch out for stimulants, but I could do heroin a couple of times and have no desire whatsoever to go out and do it again.

The larger point is that there is no drug so bad that we're better off prohibiting it than we are attempting to regulate and control its use. You can't control what you prohibit.

[Quantess]

86. "......and some of the people fall for it"

It's a real shame that authority figures have traditionally used scare tactics and exaggeration when counseling young people about the dangers of drugs. Your skepticism is a typical result of constantly being told ridiculous scare stories.

I had a friend who, after he got clean, confessed that when he got into heroin, he did not believe it was addictive. He figured it was just typical hyperbole, the same kind of exaggeration that teachers tell about marijuana. He had tried smoking pot, and, contrary to what authority figures had told him, the sky did not fall. So, obviously, the authority figures had been lying about heroin too......... He had to learn the hard way.

So anyway, now that you put me to the challenge, I will try to support my claim that meth is harder to quit than cocaine.

[Arkansas Granny]

67. I've known several people who have screwed up not only their

lives, but those of family and friends, also, with an addiction to street meth. It is really bad stuff. I have to wonder, though, if a clean, pharmaceutical grade was available, would it have the same effects as the street meth? I don't recall anyone that I knew using the pill form that was available many years ago getting as messed up as those I've known that use the stuff that's around today. I've never used either, so I have no personal experience to draw from.

[Hippo_Tron]

88. Would you at least support treatment over prison time for Meth users?

I don't see how locking them up for decades does anything to solve the Meth problem.

[Mikey929]

3. Paper Trail

I just voted in the poll and I didn't get a paper ballot to prove my vote. I worry I may have been disenfranchised! :)

[PistolSteve]

4. Umm... it doesn't count towards anything, so no

And welcome to DU

[RaleighNCDUer]

5. Well, that's what you get for voting on a computer. nt

[The Anti-Neo Con]

7. I think it all should be legal, except meth.

The reason meth should remain illegal is because mistakes in the manufacturing process can cause devastating explosions, such as taking out an entire apartment building. If it were legal, that would just encourage people to make it on their own.

[kiahzero]

11. Making it at home could still be illegal.

Just like moonshine.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

12. Um...

if it were legal wouldn't that mean that it gets manufactured in a safe environment, instead of desperate people trying to make it at home?

[porphyrian]

13. Should gunpowder be illegal then?

Or could meth be legally created in factories similar to powder plants?

[The Anti-Neo Con]

20. That would be different if it was created in a safe facility.

My point is that private citizens who may not know what they're doing shouldn't be making it in their homes. I have a co-worker who's 13-year old son was badly maimed in a meth lab explosion. The people in the apartment above them were making meth and there was an explosion.

[porphyrian]

24. If you could just pick it up at the store, who would bother trying to make it at home?

It's legal to make beer at home, but most people don't bother, not because it's dangerous, but because it isn't worth the hassle. That would go double for something that could blow up your home.

[PistolSteve]

31. Actually - it's illegal to make beer in a lot of places

Moonshine is pretty popular in my area - and people hide it from the cops all the time (not like there's ever a big bust or anything)

[porphyrian]

34. I don't know what you mean by "a lot of places," but it's my understanding...

...that, unless you live in a dry county, you can make up to a certain amount for personal consumption. At any rate, the point I was making is that, when it's legal, people usually don't bother trying to make it at home. With something as dangerous as meth, you can count on almost no one making it at home if it could be bought legally. It's too dangerous, and wouldn't be nearly as profitable as it is now.

[Alexander]

8. Marijuana - legalized, taxed, regualated, everything else should be...

Decriminalized, with emphasis on treatment instead of punishment. If any medicinal purposes are found in a particular drug, then that drug should be legal with a doctor's prescription & warnings all over the container.

This would empty out the jails and cause crime to plummet, not to mention help business and bring in tax money to the government.

[Union Thug]

10. "This would empty out the jails and cause crime to plummet, "

Which is one of the reasons why decriminalization won't happen any time soon...

[The Anti-Neo Con]

15. Sad but true.

No one involved in a non-violent drug offense such as simple possession, sale, or manufacturing should be imprisoned IMO.

Now if one robs & shoots a dealer over a transaction, then I say lock them up and throw away the key.

[Alexander]

26. On the flip side, it is good for business. That gives me hope.

It's often said that the reason marijuana (and possibly other drugs) isn't legal is because the big businesses haven't figured out a way to make a buck off of it.

Well, Gore is convincing lots of moneyed interests to drop billions in the name of the environment, as he is able to convince people caring about the environment is also business-friendly.

If anyone comes forward with a similar "this will CREATE private-sector jobs" idea about pot, I foresee it being legal fairly quickly.

[catabryna]

22. It's always nice...

when great minds think alike. *chuckle*. Your post states my position exactly. :toast:

[mtnester]

16. My opinion is if you have to change it from what it was to something else

then it should be illegal.

If it grows on the side of the road in its natural form, it should be an over 21 drug and decriminalized.

[PistolSteve]

18. Opium grows on the side of the road...

and taking enough of it is no different than doing heroin.

[mtnester]

23. Agreed

my opinion stays the same. :)

[Union Thug]

25. simple as scratching a seed pod with a pin, fingernail, etc.

Funny, I don't have problem with opium, but I do have a problem with heroin. Can't say why, but it may have to do with herion's messy needles, etc.

[PistolSteve]

29. I've known a couple people who screwed up their lives on 'pod tea'

Opium is really underestimated - people tend to think it's like marijuana. I am unsure how I feel about it being legal - I'm a flipflopper on the issue all the time.

[Union Thug]

33. Is this a function of education (or lack thereof)?

I've known people to harvest and consume their own opium in a responsible manner. They were acutely aware of it's potential and treated it with the respect it deserves.

[PistolSteve]

42. I've known people like that too - most people aren't that smart though nt

[Union Thug]

57. But that's not my problem. If some moron is too lazy

to do some simple, REALLY simple research and fuck themselves up as a result, why should I be punished for it? If I want to grow sominf. poppies and ingest a little opium now and again, I should be able to do that. I should not be punished for the poor choices of others.

[porphyrian]

37. How many people screw up their lives on alcohol annually?

Or on irresponsible use of credit, for that matter? Legality has nothing to do with causing or preventing bad life decisions.

[PistolSteve]

44. But when your bad decision effect my life - it matters

The government has a right to control certain personal decisions - like drunk driving. Doing meth isn't much different than drunk driving, you can do a lot of harm.

[porphyrian]

49. You can do a lot of harm driving at all.

There are fatal accidents every day that have nothing to do with intoxication. Should we make driving illegal?

[Union Thug]

55. But are we legislating against the behaviors that "effect your life"

or should we legislate against the drug? If the former, then we treat people like those that kill while driving drunk. If we legislate against the drug, then alcohol needs to be banned right now.

Yes, I know there are difs, but it's a question I struggle with.

[High Plains]

56. "Doing meth...you can do a lot of harm"

My doing meth (or any other drug, but meth IS the demon drug du jour) doesn't inherently, automatically harm you. If I want to stay up all night making silly drawings because I'm amped on meth, what business is that of yours?

On the other hand, I don't mean to suggest that some meth users don't cause harm. They may steal, they may go psycho, they may drive under the influence. But guess what? All of those things are already crimes. Arrest people for real crimes, not for using substances you don't like.

You are arguing that you have a sort of "personal security" interest in prohibiting meth use. But in this country we also have a sort of "liberty interest." I personally find it horrific and mind-boggling to think the state can take a person who is not doing anything to anyone (except possibly himself), kidnap him, and hold him prisoner for years at a time.

[PistolSteve]

76. Then you should be in favor of drunk driving using your logic...

Drunk driving doesn't automatically harm someone. You can say it is their LIBERTY to do it. Drunk driving itself does no harm... neither does meth.

What results from each DOES do harm to people like me on a scale that is larger enough for concern.

[High Plains]

81. Actually, I included drugged driving in the list of crimes.

Clearly, steering a couple of tons of metal around at high speeds while impaired is a threat to public safety. And equally clearly, it does harm. We scrape up the results off the highways every day.

Now, tell me how the guy staying up all night drawing silly pictures harms you?

As I said above, if someone commits a crime (against others or their property), he should be punished. But using a drug does not, by itself, rise to that standard. Drug users should be left alone unless they commit crimes, and by extension, so should their suppliers.

[Union Thug]

32. I really like this concept..

Funny, this concept is partially in effect. Why is it that I can buy and sell San Pedros and Peruvian Torch cacti without any regulation? However, if I decided to sell it dried for anything other than incense (not, of course, for human consumption), then I get nailed? Further, why are they any different than peyote? Sominforum (sp?) poppies as well.. The laws make no sense. blah.

[MadAsHellNewYorker]

62. so alcohol would be illegal

but peyote for everyone :smoke:

[Union Thug]

64. Sounds good to me.

Alcohol just leaves me feeling really shitty anyway! :-)

[Jcrowley]

19. Some drugs do very serious damage

Your brain on LSD:


Your brain on television:

[Union Thug]

27. nice!

[porphyrian]

21. Prohibition never works as promised.

If these people really cared about our health, alcohol, tobacco and fast food would be illegal. If these people really cared about crime, they would address the issues that cause it - poverty, education, corporate profiteering, etc. The truth is that prohibitionists only care about controlling the behavior of others. My question is, who controls their behavior?

[spanone]

28. Drug that Big Pharma makes tons on are legal as hell.

[PistolSteve]

30. Yes - but you can't always get them

Stuff like oxycontin is so hard for people to get if they are poor - it use to be easy, but now all those users are switching to meth (which is odd - because it is completely different)

[Union Thug]

35. Legalize Absynthe NOW! :-)

I've heard it's good.

[Jed Dilligan]

36. The question is:

What should the government tax sales of, and what should it give away for free? I think the government should be distributing all the highly addictive drugs (cocaine, meth, and heroin) free of charge at clinics. You would have to register as an addict and submit to special monitoring, but you'd also be eligible for supportive housing. The clinics would encourage people to quit using and go into treatment, but always voluntarily. The meth would be manufactured in safe facilities, and the coke and smack bought from the governments of producing countries.

On the other hand, the government should be making money off our appetite for less addictive drugs such as marijuana, psychedelics, and perhaps ecstasy. My only concern here is that the small-scale, organic, connoisseur cultivators of today would get ripped to shreds by Marlboro Joints. I would definitely approve of some kind of operational size limit on pot cultivation.

[Maestro]

39. Well the "War on Drugs" does not work

so let's decriminalize most drugs except for obviously destructive drugs like heroin, cocaine, meth and all the derivatives of the three, smack, crack, cheese, etc...

Marijuana should be legal and taxed like cigarettes with the same penalties for driving under the influence as people who drink and drive. It also should carry warnings like tobacco and alcohol products as well.

[PistolSteve]

41. The problem with marijuana is that it is hard to PROVE how intoxicated they are

Alcohol is simple, but marijuana effects people differently. It would be hard to draw the line of intoxicated or not and most cases would be thrown out of court if it couldn't be proven. A blood test would just confirm you used, not that you were high at the time.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

45. Field sobriety test.

If somebody is coordinated enough to pass a field sobriety test, I can't think of a good reason they shouldn't be driving.

[PistolSteve]

47. You don't go to prison or get a ticket for failing a field sobriety test

because it is subjective - you go to prison when they find drugs/alcohol in your system after they do the test. If legal, it would be hard to figure out when the person did it.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

50. You go to prison or get a ticket for drunken driving.

drunken driving is bad becuase you lose coordination and cause accidents.

If a person's coordination is fine, I see no crime.

[Union Thug]

51. If it were legalized, I'm sure some brainiac in a lab

would come up with a way to do this. It can't be that hard to figure out, can it?

on edit... legalization would be the economic incentive to get our boys in control working on this :-) Think of the potential for new lab tech jobs!

[High Plains]

58. Test for impairment, not for metabolites!

Duh. If you can pass the field sobriety test, who cares what metabolites you're carrying in your blood?

[Union Thug]

61. Sometimes I need a 'duh' to help me get it. I think you're right.

Why does it need to be any more complicated than that?

[Maestro]

83. Good points. I really didn't think that far.

Either way, I just can't see how marijuana is any worse for you than tobacco or alcohol other than the long term effects probably have some pretty serious impairments just as smoking and alcohol.

[porphyrian]

46. The problem with penalizing drivers for smoking pot...

...is in the differences between the two drugs and the methods of testing for them. Alcohol is a depressant. Marijuana is categorized as a "mild hallucinogen," I believe (at any rate, it isn't a depressant). Unless you've consumed toxic levels of alcohol and/or shut down your filtering organs, virtually all of it will be gone in a couple of days. Pot can be detected in your system over a month later, depending on a number of factors. How can you prove you weren't smoking at all today when you were pulled over if you blazed the night before?

[PistolSteve]

48. Exactly - I'm not saying it should be illegal, but I sure understand the concerns

[Maestro]

84. You bring up good points that I hadn't thought about.

There are many things to think about when legalizing pot. However, I think there should be discussion. We, as a society, seem to demonize so many things that if confronted and discussed really would not be so taboo. Sex is another aspect of life which American society simply freaks out about. Instead of talking about abstinence, let's give children good information. Anyhow, I am getting off the subject. Thanks for the comments.

[seabeyond]

60. outlaw cigarettes and fat, legalize drugs. aren't we funnnnnny n/t

[Union Thug]

63. Who said anything about outlawing fat, cigs,etc?

Not me.

[seabeyond]

66. me either. doesnt mean i havent seen thread after thread on it

here at du. are you saying you havent seen the threads?

[Union Thug]

68. If fat is banned, I'm in trouble. ;-)

[skypilot]

69. 53% so far say...

...that most drugs should be decriminalized but the exception should be crack, meth,heroine and "other hard drugs". Maybe I'm not familiar with most of the drugs that are out there but if we keep crack, meth, heroine and "other hard drugs" illegal then what does "most drugs should be decriminalized" mean? And who will determine what is and is not a "hard" drug?

[GliderGuider]

71. I'm a hard-liner when it comes to drugs

Legalize them all, I mean. And that includes meth, cocaine and heroin. Put the same rules in place as for alcohol. Make it illegal to sell or give them to minors. We might want to regulate the amounts of manufactured drugs like "the Big Three" that can be purchased at once to make overconsumption more difficult. But for God's sake stop putting people in jail for using any of them. And for God's sake stop putting people in jail for growing or consuming plants.

Drug use is at most a health and social issue, and for drugs like marijuana it's not even that. Time to grow the f#@k up, already.

[bamacrat]

78. Weed's all I need.

:smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :headbang:

[Az]

79. Legalize, Regulate, and Tax

Where this notion that there are prescribed forms of happiness that we are allowed to pursue is in opposition to the very founding of this nation. Freedom means the right to be as stupid as we want to be as long as we don't hurt anyone else. Legalize, Regulate, and Tax. The tax income alone would fund a universal health care plan capable of taking care of everyone including the people too stupid to stay away from the harder stupider drugs.

[killbotfactory]

85. Decriminalize the least harmful ones

No gateway drug bullshit, thanks.

For the other's, like meth or crack, spend money on treatment centers, instead of punishing people for doing it with jail time.

[spacelady]

87. It is the drug war machine that is killing people and ruining lives on a

much larger scale than would happen if adults were given a little more credit for monitoring their medication & recreation.

[Ms. Clio]

89. This pollster now sleeps with the fishes