It's a silly war, but I wouldn't call it the most senseless. As said above, isn't 500,000 a joke? Also...
"In days, a global commission including former *heads of state and foreign policy chiefs of the UN, EU, US, Brazil, Mexico* and more will break the taboo and publicly call for new approaches including decriminalization and regulation of drugs."
Former leaders who would probably have trouble getting a new job if they tried to run without having that "tough on drugs" stance. Hell, even if Barack was going, the Republicans wouldn't let it happen. Rich people already get all the drugs they want/need from their doctors. Hell... Even if you're not rich, just do some research on doctors in your area and go say the right symptoms.
I think drug policies are way outdated. The world is not black and white. I think it is important to clearly define different types of drugs into categories. Things like marijuana is not harmless, but compared to other stuff like tobacco and alcohol, which is perfectly legal, is it much more harmful? Or is it less harmful? The advances of marijuana for medical use is also important, if a patient can be helped by this substance but can't get it legally, I do think there is somthing wrong.
If we do end up making weed legal, do you think this will decrease the power of the drug cartels?
I think it just might, it's the bread and butter of the drug cartels, and is the most sold and used drug there is.
As drugs like LSD, shrooms, DMT etc, do you think these should be made illegal? LSD is mostly harmless, death by overdose is uncommon, and it is not addictive. But then there's stuff like HPPD and bad-trips that can lead to mental issues...
Anyway, I think somthing needs to be done, and that right soon. I think regulation is the way to go.
I signed. Perhaps regulation is a better step, the ban is just forcing people to buy it illegally and give massive amounts of money to criminals who found their way into drug dealing.
On June 01 2011 02:07 optical630 wrote: what good can come out of regulating drugs?
i agree with cannabis, but the hard shit like cocaine, how can that seriously be regulated?
edit; only 500k signatures? thats a laughable amount
Well the idea is that you spend less money fighting against drug smugglers becuase now it's legal to buy so the illegal market is pushed out for the most part, along with that you spend money on education of the public on the effects of drugs with that hoping that most people make the right decision not to do drugs. Ofc for the illegal markets to be pushed out the thing like coke and heroin need to be readily available meaning people need to actually be using it. It's more a move about money rather then a move about morals, esp american morals brought about the foundation that is the forms of Christianity that was/is popular in the US which prizes the ideals of working hard and demonizes the use of drugs and generally anything that would be considered lazy. There was a reason why the US was able to pass prohibition.
On June 01 2011 02:07 optical630 wrote: what good can come out of regulating drugs?
i agree with cannabis, but the hard shit like cocaine, how can that seriously be regulated?
edit; only 500k signatures? thats a laughable amount
Well the idea is that you spend less money fighting against drug smugglers becuase now it's legal to buy so the illegal market is pushed out for the most part, along with that you spend money on education of the public on the effects of drugs with that hoping that most people make the right decision not to do drugs. Ofc for the illegal markets to be pushed out the thing like coke and heroin need to be readily available meaning people need to actually be using it.
That's the only pro-legalization argument that I think is reasonable. Supporters need to use this one more and the silly ones less.
But don't you agree we would first need better understanding of how much it would cost to regulate and fiscalize that hard drugs like cocaine and crack still aren't being sold as they shouldn't? You now moved the problem from paying cops to run around town looking for dealers. To bureaucrats being paid to look for clever frauds. And if fiscalization of regulation just happen to fail. Then you'll have increase of hard drug usage. And increase in healthcare cost from more people dying of crack.
How can you be sure that these new added costs won't be even bigger than the current costs?
On June 01 2011 02:07 optical630 wrote: what good can come out of regulating drugs?
i agree with cannabis, but the hard shit like cocaine, how can that seriously be regulated?
edit; only 500k signatures? thats a laughable amount
Well the idea is that you spend less money fighting against drug smugglers becuase now it's legal to buy so the illegal market is pushed out for the most part, along with that you spend money on education of the public on the effects of drugs with that hoping that most people make the right decision not to do drugs. Ofc for the illegal markets to be pushed out the thing like coke and heroin need to be readily available meaning people need to actually be using it.
That's the only pro-legalization argument that I think is reasonable. Supporters need to use this one more and the silly ones less.
But don't you agree we would first need better understanding of how much it would cost to regulate and fiscalize that hard drugs like cocaine and crack still aren't being sold as they shouldn't? You now moved the problem from paying cops to run around town looking for dealers. To bureaucrats being paid to look for clever frauds. And if fiscalization of regulation just happen to fail. Then you'll have increase of hard drug usage. And increase in healthcare cost from more people dying of crack.
How can you be sure that these new added costs won't be even bigger than the current costs?
well the current war on drugs is failing. Everyone can buy this stuff illegally if they so wished and this makes drugs a legal industry and thus subject to worker union laws etc.etc.
In 2010 research shows that the "heroin-junkies" have disappeared from the streets of the Netherlands and the treatment is upgraded from a test-trial to standard treatment for otherwise untreatable addicts. Also, the number of heroin addicts has dropped by more than 30% since 1983
By making something illegal you provide groundwork for crooks and badguys to set up shop and earn money. By making these things legal you give power to the people and leave choice up to each indivual, form an industry around it, an Industry you can tax and form boundaries around.
As it stands i dont se why not? The people who would do / sell drugs already do /sell them.
On June 01 2011 03:05 Spidinko wrote: I don't understand how legalizing drugs is goind to help humanity in any way.
Not gonna sign.
MAYBE YOU COULD READ ANY OF THE MILLION POSTS/WEBPAGES EXPLAINING IT THEN
But 99% of those millions are just saying a combination of one of these: - it's natural so it can't possibly be bad - three wrongs make one right. Aka tobacco and alcohol are also bad. - points to country that didn't legalize but claim they did anyway: portugal, netherlands, switzerlands are popular targets - points out violence of drug cartels, but forgets about violence of drug junkies - talks of conspiracy theories of prisons who wants to profit of arresting junkies, but ignores lobbies of billionaire drug lords
There's only 1% of those webpages who actually talk about reasonable arguments like the economic question someone brought up a few posts ago. So it's hard to weed down those millions of pro legalization sites into something useful. But even those who do make reasonable economic analysis, I still feel they're dismissing the other side of the argument and ignoring the potential economic risks that legalization could bring.
On June 01 2011 03:05 Spidinko wrote: I don't understand how legalizing drugs is goind to help humanity in any way.
Not gonna sign.
MAYBE YOU COULD READ ANY OF THE MILLION POSTS/WEBPAGES EXPLAINING IT THEN
christian: I don't understand evolution it doesn't make sense!
*never reads anything on evolution ever*
I've read posts in this thread. They didn't convince me.
Didn't know I need to have MD from anything that is discussed in a thread.
Of course it doesn't make sense to me, as I said earlier, I don't understand how it could help. I didn't say it couldn't.
THANKS FOR HELPING ME UNDERSTAND.
atheist: I'm right.
Because by keeping them illegal we are spending billions of dollars in law enforcement. Not only that, but we are creating a black market to traffic these drugs; markets owned by dangerous, murderous drug lords. It would be much better to have regulated sale for tax revenue, sanitation and the general safety of everyone involved. Also, the money we spend keeping all these people in jail is pretty absurd.
On June 01 2011 03:05 Spidinko wrote: I don't understand how legalizing drugs is goind to help humanity in any way.
Not gonna sign.
There's only 1% of those webpages who actually talk about reasonable arguments like the economic question someone brought up a few posts ago. So it's hard to weed down those millions of pro legalization sites into something useful. But even those who do make reasonable economic analysis, I still feel they're dismissing the other side of the argument and ignoring the potential economic risks that legalization could bring.
I do not believe that any harm-minimisation approach to tackling drug issues is good. I guess that the liberal voice is stronger on the internet, but for me the images of failed drug regulation trials (such as free needle-exchanges and the resulting surge of dumps of used needles littering open streets) are much more saddening than anything else.
I am strongly in favour of taking increasingly punitive measurements to tackle drug use, and I do not encourage people to sign this unless you have spent an exhaustive amount of time studying this subject and have an imformed opinion. Harm-reduction stratagies. Do. Not. Work.
On June 01 2011 03:05 Spidinko wrote: I don't understand how legalizing drugs is goind to help humanity in any way.
Not gonna sign.
MAYBE YOU COULD READ ANY OF THE MILLION POSTS/WEBPAGES EXPLAINING IT THEN
christian: I don't understand evolution it doesn't make sense!
*never reads anything on evolution ever*
I've read posts in this thread. They didn't convince me.
Didn't know I need to have MD from anything that is discussed in a thread.
Of course it doesn't make sense to me, as I said earlier, I don't understand how it could help. I didn't say it couldn't.
THANKS FOR HELPING ME UNDERSTAND.
atheist: I'm right.
You didn't understand because you're not aproaching the subject with an understanding attitude. If you do research, read a lot of articles on the issue and examine the arguments from both sides you would understand. Reading random post in some thread would only give you fractions of the actual information, some probably out of context or missinterpreted.
On another note, heres an awesome animation on marihuana prohibition, I think it illustrates the events QUITE accuretly
On June 01 2011 03:25 aloT wrote: I do not believe that any harm-minimisation approach to tackling drug issues is good. I guess that the liberal voice is stronger on the internet, but for me the images of failed drug regulation trials (such as free needle-exchanges and the resulting surge of dumps of used needles littering open streets) are much more saddening than anything else.
I am strongly in favour of taking increasingly punitive measurements to tackle drug use, and I do not encourage people to sign this unless you have spent an exhaustive amount of time studying this subject and have an imformed opinion. Harm-reduction stratagies. Do. Not. Work.
Why would you enforce more 'punitive measures'? Why would you be allowed to dictate what I can and cannot do when it has no bearing upon your life?
EPT
