Legalize All Drugs? Would It Work?

[UltimateApathy]

For the last century or so the world has generally has generally been taking its drug-related cues from the notoriously prudish USA and its bullshit "War On Drugs", but finally there may be some light at the end of the tunnel with the recent marijuana legalizations in various states. Also, those that follow the news may have noticed that the states that have legalized recreational marijuana have been making millions of dollars in profits while also experiencing marked decreases in organized criminal activity.

So I guess the question we are looking at here is whether societies should take the next step and legalize, regulate, and profit from all other recreational drugs as well. And when we look at it objectively, what fucking right does the government have to tell people what chemicals they are allowed to choose to put into their bodies, especially when there is NO potential harm to others involved such as non-sober driving (which should always be illegal)?

It is my view that if a person wants to "kill themselves with fun" (to put it dramatically and drastically) without harming anyone else, then that should absolutely be their legal right. Oh, and putting the gangsters with their rat-poison-cut toxins out of business also seems like a pretty good idea too. What are your opinions on this?

 

[arg]

legalize it all, but no insurance coverage when druggies OD

 

[SentinelSlain]

Well at least you wouldn't have heroin addicts burglarizing people. Personally I think repeated offenders in prison should be given a dose of ayahuasca and have their testosterone levels artificially reduced.

 

[Baroque]

It is my view that if a person wants to "kill themselves with fun" (to put it dramatically and drastically) without harming anyone else, then that should absolutely be their legal right. What are your opinions on this?

While I fundamentally believe the government should have no right to regulate what we grow in our gardens or cook in our kitchens, the above statement is ridiculously socially irresponsible. What if the person "killing themselves with fun" is a mother or father? Obviously anyone "killing themselves with fun" is someone's son or daughter. Even if that means nothing to you it is a Massive waste of resources to support someone for 18 years and educate them etc, just so they can be like "lols heroine is fun" and die. That should never be ok, or some kind of right. We have a duty to our families who raised us and yes even our government as citizens to not waste our lives like that. Among countless other reasons.

 

[UltimateApathy]

legalize it all, but no insurance coverage when druggies OD

If people knew exactly what they were putting into their bodies (dosage and purity of dosage), it would also be much more difficult to OD...

 

[Baroque]

But as I said we should be able to legally grow weed for medical purposes and even poppies for emergency painkillers. Recreational use is something else entirely.

 

[UltimateApathy]

While I fundamentally believe the government should have no right to regulate what we grow in our gardens or cook in our kitchens, the above statement is ridiculously socially irresponsible. What if the person "killing themselves with fun" is a mother or father? Obviously anyone "killing themselves with fun" is someone's son or daughter. Even if that means nothing to you it is a Massive waste of resources to support someone for 18 years and educate them etc, just so they can be like "lols heroine is fun" and die. That should never be ok, or some kind of right. We have a duty to our families who raised us and yes even our government as citizens to not waste our lives like that. Among countless other reasons.

The people in question could just as easily "kill themselves with fun" with alcohol, gambling, or even fucking video game addiction (quite common in Asia). Trying to ban everything that could possibly be addictive is just goddamn retarded. Give people freedom of choice and view those that choose poorly as "Darwinism in action."

 

[King Richard]

Yes. Yes.

 

[Matt]

Legalize. Would help a lot of different things, including the surplus prison population, gang violence, etc

 

[The Butt]

The government should have literally NO say what I put in my body. It is not their right, and it is a violation of basic human rights.

Now, what I hypothetically do when I am ON drugs, that is another concern.

 

[Bloopy]

Probably fine if it's regulated and people can trust what they're taking. It raises an interesting question about how much life insurance companies should know about your lifestyle.

 

[tagradh]

Arguments in favour of legalization/decriminalization completely destroy those against.

But conservative fucknuts and people with vested interests are gonna stop the UK heading in that direction for a while yet.

 

[Matt]

The government should have literally NO say what I put in my body. It is not their right, and it is a violation of basic human rights.

Now, what I hypothetically do when I am ON drugs, that is another concern.

It becomes their concern when you put shit in your body that requires urgent and expensive medical care which you obviously wouldn't be able to afford. Or like you said, what you do that physically harms other people.

 

[Nephilim96]

Yeah, I believe humans should be allowed to put whatever they want in their body. Instead of using all that money to imprison people with drug addictions, use that money towards more government funded drug rehab centers.

 

[Draehl]

Pot will be legal in the US within 10 years. Start there and test the waters with other stuff.

 

[Nephilim96]

Yeah, I wouldn't be shocked at all to see psychedelics (acid, shrooms, ayahuasca, etc.) and MDMA become legal for medicinal purposes (at the very least), sometime in the future, well after marijuana has been made legal federally. They already have medicinal methamphetamine (desoxyn) and amphetamine (adderall) for psychiatric use, I don't see why they couldn't use MDMA for PTSD and psychedelics for a wide range of things (PTSD, OCD, death anxiety, etc.).

 

[The Butt]

It becomes their concern when you put shit in your body that requires urgent and expensive medical care which you obviously wouldn't be able to afford. Or like you said, what you do that physically harms other people.

...then don't give urgent and expensive medical care to those people? It's like if someone drinks bleach; they knew the risks they were getting into.

As for physically harming other people, there are laws against that anyways. Driving under the influence, assault, etc.

It is NOT the government's concern. In the ten years that I've care about drug laws, I haven't heard a SINGLE argument in favor of keeping drugs illegal that is of sound logic.

 

[Nephilim96]

or they can give them medical care and make them pay out of pocket.

 

[Baroque]

Ok suppose the government has no right to tell you what you can put in your body. But then you say they do have a right to tell you what you can and can't do while inebriated. But being inebriated you have less control over what you do. Then you're still letting them have control over you. Why not just let them tell you not to put that in your body in the first place.

Ok so the government is supposed to pay for your rehab. And counseling for you and all the family members you hurt. The government is supposed to pay for drug education programs to tell people drugs are bad, meanwhile saying that it's ok to take drugs legally. Why not just save money and say you can't do drugs in the first place? That's a clear message drugs are bad without being hypocritical.

Who is going to pay for the rehab of this new crop of irresponsible druggies? The responsible taxpayers who knew that drugs are bad in the first place and chose not to do them. How is that fair?

It's not fair to the taxpayers, the families of the users with addiction problems, society for having to deal with more addicted users....

 

[Matt]

^ Right. It's not like you can do whatever the fuck you want without any consequences in a normal society.