Silk Road forums
Discussion => Off topic => Topic started by: Kira on December 18, 2011, 11:51 pm
-
Do you really want complete legalize? I think that existing drug policy does a great job from keeping a large people population from becoming an addicts, yet it forces small group of people that buy the drugs to be more quiet about them. I think Czech and Netherland policy is almost perfect, if you ask me you only need to legalize LSD, marijuana and shrooms, other drugs to be decriminalized, but still not allowed to produce. That should make buying "hard" drugs possible, but not that easy for mass population for becoming addicts. Today's world drug policy is really nasty because only harmful and boring alcohol and nicotine is allowed, other drugs that cause less harm is prohibited and it's really not a good idea to allow people to use psychoactive substance that is such a healthkiller.
-
- a lot of us would say we're aren't addicts, from experience sure its not how the media and odd documentary show drug users -we're not all down and out heroin users
living in slums.
- the reasons for keeping them banned are numerous including fear of the unknown, beige conservative governments controlling the masses, no taxes exist on these.
- legalise / decriminalise all except hard drugs would be a good start, probably not all drugs at the same time, otherwise there is likely to be an overwhelming
response / reaction to sudden "free drugs".
-
no, risking arrest to alter my mind doesnt suit well with me
-
No prohibition. It takes only a fraction of money that it takes for courts, police, DEA, mandatory rehab, etc to subsidize diamorphine and so forth and maintain hardcore addicts on it allowing them to be functioning addicts.
Overdoses? Darwinism in action. No excuse not to inform yourself these days with the plethora of harm reduction activists, forums, outreach centers. I have zero sympathy for those who overdose or who become addicts and I say this having suffered addiction myself. It was nobody's fault but my own.
Many people fear a scenario of diamorphine addicted zombies running around raping and pillaging for their fix. Well, give people immunity to kill whomever breaks into their residence. Ban habitual burglars, mugger, etc from purchasing any drug including alcohol and tobacco. In severe cases, compel them to get on lifetime drug maintenance. Problem solved.
-
Overdoses? Darwinism in action. No excuse not to inform yourself these days with the plethora of harm reduction activists, forums, outreach centers. I have zero sympathy for those who overdose or who become addicts and I say this having suffered addiction myself. It was nobody's fault but my own.
Why do you care about who's fault it is that much? The reasons aren't the main problems, what we care about is statistics. I'm really sure that legalizing all the drugs is obviously will lead to increasing the small group of drug users to be a really large % of whole country population. No matter who's fault it is, I care about statistics, and they say that it will only make the general population worse. Right now we can use drugs if we want, but this requires not that much, just being quiet and careful and having some connections. Yet, some drugs have to be legalized, I'm satisfied with existing policy about some strong drugs, like heroin, cocaine or meth, that should not be easy to buy for the masses.
-
You guys are acting like if heroin were legal, everyone would flock to it and become addicts...
Heroin is available here on SR but im pretty sure the majority of people here do not use it and do not plan on using it, ever.
Addiction should be treated medically, not criminally...
Also, experimenting with drugs opens your mind to new ways of thinking and new ways of experiencing life, i would hardly view a large amount of people trying lsd as a bad thing.
Bottom line is, do you need someone else to threaten you with prison time to prevent you from making bad choices about what you put into your body? Most would say no. It's a question of freedom. I feel i have the natural right to do with my body as i wish, as it is my life and no one else's.
I don't need another person to protect me from myself.
-
I'm really sure that legalizing all the drugs is obviously will lead to increasing the small group of drug users to be a really large % of whole country population.
Well, that thing you're really sure of is demonstrably wrong ;)
Studies in countries who liberalized their drug policies - Portugal most recently comes to mind, have show DECREASES in overall drug usage after legalization. A lot of it is because the profit motive removes the illegality of it, which deflates the underground 'scene' where groups of folks hanging out together doing illegal things tend to do the same illegal drugs. It's not often you see a pothead, a cokehead, a smackhead and a crack addict all on the same bowling team.
For a real long term example, use of cannabis in The Netherlands both overall, and especially in the under 25 and under 16 segments of the population, is FAR LESS than countries with harsh drug policies like the US, Canada and the United Kingdom. Toking is 'cool after school' cause it's edgy and illegal, but about as welcome as a smoker in a restaurant with the same age group in The Netherlands.
I really wish this was more common knowledge, as it usually comes as quite a surprise to people who think that it's 'obvious' that legalization would increase use.
-
Looking from another perspective, if dopes were made legal, there would be nothing valuable about it. It would be like alcohol and tobacco, everyone would take it freely as he pleases.
The CIA or FBI understands there would always be black market. And making dopes illegal makes me treasure the forbidden fruit even more :D
-
my partner and i had a debate years ago about legalization. she's a very occassional user and had virtually no opinion before the discussion. after a few hours (and a gorgeous drive through a natural park) we had hashed out a solution that honestly looked like SR. this was far before i discovered it. for hard drugs and such, individuals were given tokens (much like bc) and could discretely purchase substances online and have them delivered to the home. harder drugs had to stay on property and DUIs still applied. cannabis and other safe drugs were unlimited and could be produced. alcohol was put on the online list.
of course there were holes. others could use their tokens to purchase for another. so it wasn't perfect. but i'm a strong believer one should be able to use any substance they desire as long as it does not interfere with another's rights or harms another. i am a victim of the war on drugs. possession of a microscopic amount of a misc. powder led me down a dark path including jail time and years in the legal system. i have never commited any other crime, not even a speeding ticket, but now have limited rights and will have to fight for years to clear my name. i am so ridiculously law abiding i get called a "grandma" sometimes. yet i absolutely do not believe in the current drug laws and after playing good girl i still indulge responsibly.
i could go on and on. but i'll just quote Dr. King.
"One who breaks an unjust law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law."
Martin Luther King, Jr.
*destiny*
-
The world would be a far better place if they'd just let Robert Heinlein write the drug laws, hell, all the laws. There'd only be like seven of them.
-
Looking from another perspective, if dopes were made legal, there would be nothing valuable about it. It would be like alcohol and tobacco, everyone would take it freely as he pleases.
- maybe not as valuable, but its accessible and available..
- the war against drugs would end....the excuse to invade these countries wouldn't be there..
- well, the product is going to be cheaper as its no longer illegal to produce, unfortunately its taxed...
-
who here thinks there should be a tax?
i remember reading an economic policy report years ago that dealt with legalization (i wish i could still find it....grr). the assumption was you tax based on harmfulness but the tax cannot make the substance more expensive then current black market (just look at cigs in new york). i remember after doing the math based on a very light tax there were tens of billions in income generated, and this was after setting up free rehab clinics (available and no stigma), drug safety education, and offsetting increased health care cost (doubt it would be much, but people would be more honest). i believe he stated the tax profits could fun the entire U.S. educational system. if you went with pure numbers tobacco n alcohol would be most expensive with that "harmfulness tax" while cannabis would likely just have a token tax (like a few cents on $20 bag).
assume you want legal meth. good street price is $100 a gram. legal supplied meth is set at 50 (still a tidy profit for manufacturer). lets say harmfulness tax adds 20%, which would be in the upper limit. that's still just 60 for chemically pure meth. the entire black market would disappear overnight. of course you slap a 50% tax on there and bring it up to 75 for a gram and you might start seeing a small black market emerge. in the end tho, it would mostly be chem geeks making small scale batches for friends, as who is going to dive into an illegal black market when you can have a pure gram shipped to ur house for only a few dollars more? convenience vs. liberty i suppose.
of course who produces the chems and checks for purity? FDA? or maybe give those DEA guys a job? (the DEA actually campaigns against legalization, which is extremely unethical for a government agency to take a political view, but i know it's because they want the cash flowing and asset fortifiture). maybe the DEA can actually stand for what it means.. they could enforce standards in manufacture and production.
everyone should be free to grow cannabis. just like alcohol, however, you get taxed when u start laying down whole fields for recreational use. maybe 1 or 2% max.
of course this is putting alot of trust in the government. ::shivers::
*destiny*
-
No group of people should be able to initiate violence against another group of people for making a decision based on their own body.
This is of course assuming that one group of people is not entitled to another groups labor and services (at the point of a gun). Once you have that moral hazard in place and you've violated a bunch of people's rights, then you have to violate other rights in a "preventative" fashion. They just start dropping like flies after a while.
DUI shouldn't be a crime. Having virtually no liability for killing someone and leaving his family without a provider and father is where the problem lies. All attempts at preventative and behavior-modifying mandates (always enforced with violence) have far larger unintended consequences than allowing people to deal with their own lives and take full responsibility for all their choices.
This is why drug use across the board is far higher in "drug war" countries than in countries where drugs are either decriminalized or legalized. There is a massive incentive to get that shit out on the streets because you can make more money than doing almost anything else.
the idea of "public" health care and using it's status as a 'human right' to destroy a laundry list of other, ACTUAL rights, is disgusting... harmfulness tax.
-
Of course not otherwise i wouldnt be here id be getting my quaterpounder with cheese with a side of crystal meth
-
i'm never satisfied
-
i'm never satisfied
That's what she said.
-
Not satisfied. Problems with drug use are many, but they are not best managed by law-enforcement in my view. Sure people, especially young people, get themselves into trouble with drugs. Any 15 year old should be sober and preparing for their future and to be a free, independent thinking strong person. However, when this does not happen, it is not best handled by law enforcement. These social problems are best handled by parents, friends, teachers, neighbors, and healthcare professionals ... not cops. Sure there is no guarantee for success, but law enforcement is not appropriate for these things. Also, actually for law enforcement types. Cops and those with that outlook are needed and valuable. We should therefore use them where they can do the most good: stopping actual commonly viewed criminal behavior.
So I would legalize drugs and focus law enforcement activities elsewhere, like stopping terrorism without strip searching old ladies at the airport.
-
I am not satisfied with the current drug policy.
I think its like this.
People who are going to do drugs, are going to find a way no matter what. We are here, right?
People who aren't going to do drugs, wont. They don't now, why would they later? Cause the ones who ARE going to do drugs are already doing them.
So why not legally? Its not like anyone can stop us. They can close down our corners, bust our dealers, our websites, they even bust us. But we keep on...they CANT stop us 100%.
I think its the opposite, if it were legal less people would do it as often. Like me. I have a stash, cause I don't know where I'll be able to get my next. If it were downstairs next to the cigarettes in the liquor store, I wouldn't keep any home. Then i would probably do it less often cause much like chocolate if its around its gone, so I would wait until I wanted some and just go get it.
-
No, I'm not satisfied with the existing drug policy. In fact, I'm not satisfied with any government policies.
I'll put my thoughts on the topic in the form of a very simple question.
What gives another individual the divine right to tell me what I can and can't do with my own body?
If you're typing an answer, stop. Your wasting your energy. The answer is nothing. NOTHING! Nothing gives another individual the divine right to tell me what I can or can't do with my own body.
That's it. Simple. Finished.
To the people here who are arguing for drug use to be legalized and regulated. Okay, yeah, that's a step in the right direction in the current socioeconomic system, but what good is it really when the whole socioeconomic system is totally fucked up?
"Laws" are enacted upon us via force. Tax is theft.
Fuck laws. Fuck tax. Fuck the state. No victim, no crime. :D
-
...because the people handed over power to govern w/o consultation and "they" take full advantage of this position.
-
No, I'm not satisfied with the existing drug policy. In fact, I'm not satisfied with any government policies.
I'll put my thoughts on the topic in the form of a very simple question.
What gives another individual the divine right to tell me what I can and can't do with my own body?
If you're typing an answer, stop. Your wasting your energy. The answer is nothing. NOTHING! Nothing gives another individual the divine right to tell me what I can or can't do with my own body.
That's it. Simple. Finished.
To the people here who are arguing for drug use to be legalized and regulated. Okay, yeah, that's a step in the right direction in the current socioeconomic system, but what good is it really when the whole socioeconomic system is totally fucked up?
"Laws" are enacted upon us via force. Tax is theft.
Fuck laws. Fuck tax. Fuck the state. No victim, no crime. :D
What she said.
Now let's change the fucking system from within.
-
So why not legally? Its not like anyone can stop us. They can close down our corners, bust our dealers, our websites, they even bust us. But we keep on...they CANT stop us 100%.
They don't want to stop us 100% then they would be all out of jobs and the prison industrial complex would suffer, and they would need to start formulating propaganda for the up coming war on people who eat carrots (and in about twenty years people who eat carrots will be commonly seen as sick, and carrots as poisons from the devil).
-
Do you really want complete legalize? I think that existing drug policy does a great job from keeping a large people population from becoming an addicts, yet it forces small group of people that buy the drugs to be more quiet about them. I think Czech and Netherland policy is almost perfect, if you ask me you only need to legalize LSD, marijuana and shrooms, other drugs to be decriminalized, but still not allowed to produce. That should make buying "hard" drugs possible, but not that easy for mass population for becoming addicts. Today's world drug policy is really nasty because only harmful and boring alcohol and nicotine is allowed, other drugs that cause less harm is prohibited and it's really not a good idea to allow people to use psychoactive substance that is such a healthkiller.
If people want to cut their fucking dicks off it's none of your fucking business, and the government shouldn't be dictating what people can and cannot do with their bodies, period.
-
Nothing should ever be banned. That's an absolute violation of freedom. I don't have the right to tell you what property you can own, what you're allowed to have, or how you can use your body. If government is to exist at all, it can only be to protect us from violating each others rights and NEVER to protect us from ourselves. If we give the government an excuse to do that, they'll start trying to regulate our diets, our bedrooms, our bathrooms, and other personal daily activities..... OH WAIT!
-
RON PAUL 2012!
-
I think the only satisfactory drug policy is one of complete legalization, but I don't think that that's ever going to happen, tbqh. I think if any of them are legalized, it will slowly trickle down based on how "hard" the drug is.
-
i agree with most of what has been said, the current policy is so wrong in every way..
BUT.. is there any hope for change?? im confident that weed will be legalized in a few years, but what about anything else? its good news that shrooms are being studied for medical purposes..
major reform of the system is needed, i really donr get why dont look to other countries more and modify our laws based on good results from other countries.
its not only drug laws that make more sense, school systems and security ect... yet lawmakers turn a blind eye and say "oh that law wouldnt work in america" ummm.. why not?? were all people, we all think somewhat the same.
it makes no fucking sense at all and it pisses me off honestly..
-
I wish that all drugs were legal and free to use, but there obviously has to be a compromise in a society made up with hundreds of different people with different opinions.
I wish that my country would adopt something that some countries have where drug use is treated as a health issue rather than a criminal one. I think that in Brazil the casual users have to pay a fine while addicts are directed to health care facilities. I'm not sure what they do about dealers or what my personal opinion on them is. If drugs were taxed and regulated then it would ease violent crime and there would be more jobs available. (Pot trimmers, coca growers, etc.)
I watched a PBS documentary recently about poppy growers that were falling into trouble because they borrowed money from cartels and couldn't pay them back after their crops were destroyed by the government. Both people on either end of the drug trade are suffering in some way because of current drug policies, why not try to address it in a reasonable way rather than a destructive one?