The Wall

[JKDS]

Why would there be more meth heads, would you pick up the habit if they were legal? Do you personally know anyone who would? It's not like them being illegal is stopping any of the current users, I'm not convinced everyone and their mom would immediately start using if they became legal. I'd bet experimenting with them would be less tantalizing for kids, since that would remove much of the mystique surrounding them.

There would be more meth heads because something previously illegal became legal. Are you suggesting that illegality plays absolutely NO role in deterring behavior? Thats a pretty hard position to maintain.

I am absolutely against kids "experimenting" with heroin, meth, or any other highly addictive, and dangerous drug. Addictive and dangerous is not rhetoric.

Drugs are expensive because they're illegal, and a big part of the havoc they wreak is due to their legal status. Users are outcast from society, family ties are broken, mere possession can land you in jail. Good luck getting a job as a junkie, so stealing and burglaries become a viable choice, especially when they're probably even penalized less than merely using drugs. Of course many drugs are dangerous and do have seriously fucked up effects on individuals and society, but a lot of these could imo be alleviated by legalization, or even depenalization.

https://mic.com/articles/110344/14-y...ing#.xTvZb2Xss
https://www.ted.com/talks/johann_har...ction_is_wrong

Sure. Programs in the US have had good success. Needle exchange programs, for example, tend to reduce ODs and use, in addition to lowering the risk of HIV needle transmission. One reason for this may be that people establish connections with others who can help them through whatever it is theyre going through. If heroin was dirt cheap, you wouldnt need as much money to buy it and you wouldnt necessarily commit property crimes for money.

But this isnt the whole truth. Hanging my hat on just meth for a moment, the crimes are not always monetary based. In fact, due to the damage meth does to the brain, many of the crimes are done because the guy just cant function anymore.

Idk if legal status has anything to do with getting a job though. Certainly prior convictions effect that, but being a junkie alone is enough to make a business owner pick someone else.

[CoccoBill]

There would be more meth heads because something previously illegal became legal. Are you suggesting that illegality plays absolutely NO role in deterring behavior? Thats a pretty hard position to maintain.

No I'm not suggesting that at all, pretty much every policy change has some kind of impact and consequences, often unforeseen. What I do think is that the usage increasing effect of legalization is probably exaggerated, with Portugal and Holland being good evidence for that. In Portugal after legalization all drug use is down several percentage points, drug related crime and deaths are down, rate of HIV infections is down etc.

I am absolutely against kids "experimenting" with heroin, meth, or any other highly addictive, and dangerous drug. Addictive and dangerous is not rhetoric.

I agree completely, drugs can absolutely be addictive and are undeniably dangerous. The causes and mechanisms of addiction however, might be very different to what we're used to believing, as discussed in the Ted talk I linked.

But this isnt the whole truth. Hanging my hat on just meth for a moment, the crimes are not always monetary based. In fact, due to the damage meth does to the brain, many of the crimes are done because the guy just cant function anymore.

For sure, there are substances that can cause serious permanent damage. Then again, alcohol can do that, and there are numerous illegal drugs that are objectively less dangerous and harmful than alcohol. It goes without saying that if alcohol was introduced now, it'd be considered a hard drug. If they were legalized, there would be incentive to develop less harmful alternatives.

Idk if legal status has anything to do with getting a job though. Certainly prior convictions effect that, but being a junkie alone is enough to make a business owner pick someone else.

I would think junkies and in general drug users with clearly visible signs of continuous or problem use are a minority. You might be surprised for example about opioid use prevalence among medical doctors. Many jobs also have mandatory drug testing, where any kind of use, even a one-time experiment, can completely and permanently block employment. Of course this in some cases warranted, but I would personally no more want my airline pilot to be drunk than stoned or on acid.

I just see very limited downsides and quite a few upsides with legalizing everything. All or most criminal activities related to drug trafficking gone, probably a decrease in all drug related crime, income from taxation, drug related problems more in the open and easier to deal with, easier control and monitoring related to their sales and product safety, no massive prison populations to maintain and rejected from society etc. etc. I'm a believer.

[BananaStand]

No I'm not suggesting that at all, pretty much every policy change has some kind of impact and consequences, often unforeseen. What I do think is that the usage increasing effect of legalization is probably exaggerated, with Portugal and Holland being good evidence for that. In Portugal after legalization all drug use is down several percentage points, drug related crime and deaths are down, rate of HIV infections is down etc.

I feel like the Portugal situation is somewhat misleading. First of all, they didn't legalize drugs. They decriminalized possession and use. Kind of a big difference. They still enforce the border, and if someone tries to drive over it with 10 kilos of coke in the trunk, they're seriously fucked. It also mentioned in the article that somewhere along the way they implemented a mandatory minimum income. It's silly to think that's not one of, if not THE, major driver here. Decrease poverty, decrease crime. Sociology 101.

If they were legalized, there would be incentive to develop less harmful alternatives.

Addicts don't seek out less intense highs.

Of course this in some cases warranted, but I would personally no more want my airline pilot to be drunk than stoned or on acid.

Ok. If the pilot makes an error, pretty much any error, he'll be immediately tested for traces of illicit substances in his system...including alcohol. So I'm not seeing your point.

I just see very limited downsides and quite a few upsides with legalizing everything.....no massive prison populations to maintain and rejected from society etc. etc. I'm a believer.

Again, you're confusing legalization, and decriminalization. If drug use is decriminalized, we still have to do things to prevent drugs from coming in to this country. We'll still have to police and prosecute the producers, traffickers, and distributors of drugs. The "massive prison population" you refer to is a myth.

In America's federal prison, there are 247 people incarcerated for drug use/possession. Yes, just 247, out of a country of 320 million!!! Drug users in state prisons are a larger population, 46,000. But that's still just 3.5% of the total inmates in the state prison systems. Hardly an epidemic.

I also suspect that a good portion of those populations are extreme cases. For example, a heroin user gets busted, slapped on the wrist, and sent home. Two weeks later, he's busted again, sent to detox/rehab, and sent home. Then a short time later, he gets busted again.....eventually there comes a point where a judge might lock someone up for their own good.

[CoccoBill]

I feel like the Portugal situation is somewhat misleading. First of all, they didn't legalize drugs. They decriminalized possession and use. Kind of a big difference. They still enforce the border, and if someone tries to drive over it with 10 kilos of coke in the trunk, they're seriously fucked. It also mentioned in the article that somewhere along the way they implemented a mandatory minimum income. It's silly to think that's not one of, if not THE, major driver here. Decrease poverty, decrease crime. Sociology 101.

I would say that legalization and decriminalization are exactly the same thing. You're of course completely right in saying that the legalization only applies to possession and personal use, not distribution. The minimum income program most likely has also had an impact, but I see no reason to think it would be the only or even the biggest reason for the change in stats.

Addicts don't seek out less intense highs.

Maybe not, but I think even addicts would prefer a safer or less addictive high. Or maybe just that there's not too much rat poison in their meth.

Ok. If the pilot makes an error, pretty much any error, he'll be immediately tested for traces of illicit substances in his system...including alcohol. So I'm not seeing your point.

Are pilots regularly tested for alcohol metabolites in their system? After the error it's kinda late, at least from a passenger's point of view.

Again, you're confusing legalization, and decriminalization. If drug use is decriminalized, we still have to do things to prevent drugs from coming in to this country. We'll still have to police and prosecute the producers, traffickers, and distributors of drugs. The "massive prison population" you refer to is a myth.

Again, no I didn't. How many drug traffickers do you think would be interested in the business if anyone could buy meth legally?

In America's federal prison, there are 247 people incarcerated for drug use/possession. Yes, just 247, out of a country of 320 million!!! Drug users in state prisons are a larger population, 46,000. But that's still just 3.5% of the total inmates in the state prison systems. Hardly an epidemic.

How the hell is drug use even a felony? Anyway, 51.8% of federal prison inmates and 15.7% of state inmates are there for drug offenses. I would call that an epidemic, and one that can be mitigated.

[BananaStand]

I would say that legalization and decriminalization are exactly the same thing.

You would be wrong.

Are pilots regularly tested for alcohol metabolites in their system? After the error it's kinda late, at least from a passenger's point of view.

I actually don't know what specific procedures are in place to test pilots for alcohol, but there are 21,000 flights a day, just domestically, in America, and crashes almost never happen. So I suspect whatever they're doing, is working. Also, don't confuse "error" with "catastrophe"

My company operates on airports, and we drug/alcohol test people for 'errors' all the time. Many of which are trivial 'mistakes' that any sober person could easily make. Maybe you're driving one of those conveyor belts carts that they use to load baggage into an airplane. Maybe you're in a hurry, don't line it up properly, and scuff the paint on a plane. That's actually a huge deal. Also, our managers are trained in something called "reasonable suspicion", which basically says we can test anyone who merely *looks* like there's a problem. I suspect that the procedures for pilots are even more rigorous.

Again, no I didn't. How many drug traffickers do you think would be interested in the business if anyone could buy meth legally?

I highly recommend you look a little deeper into the difference between 'legal', and 'decriminalized'. You CAN'T buy meth legally in Portugal, or anywhere in the world. If you get caught possessing it, you're still in trouble, just not alot of trouble. If you get caught selling it, you're still in trouble, alot of trouble.

Anyway, 51.8% of federal prison inmates and 15.7% of state inmates are there for drug offenses. I would call that an epidemic, and one that can be mitigated.

You're confusing the numbers. What specific drug offenses make up the numbers you've cited? Other than the 247 people the feds locked up for possession, all the rest of that 51.8% is there for manufacture, trafficking, distribution, and sales. Those things would still be illegal if drugs were decriminalized. Those people would still be in jail.

Your reference above to "buy meth legally" suggests to me that you're envisioning a world where you can walk into the 7-11, and pick up some milk, some bread, a pack of gum, and a vial of meth. That is most definitely NOT what's happening in Portugal, or anywhere in the world. If you're suggesting that would be a "good thing", I think you're out of your mind.

[CoccoBill]

I actually don't know what specific procedures are in place to test pilots for alcohol, but there are 21,000 flights a day, just domestically, in America, and crashes almost never happen. So I suspect whatever they're doing, is working. Also, don't confuse "error" with "catastrophe"

Well that's all besides the point anyway, which was that I personally don't make a big distinction on substances based on their legal status, but rather their effects. The only major objective property differentiating alcohol from hard drugs is its legal status. We've waged a war on drugs for decades, and it can be argued things have gotten exponentially worse because of it.

I highly recommend you look a little deeper into the difference between 'legal', and 'decriminalized'. You CAN'T buy meth legally in Portugal, or anywhere in the world. If you get caught possessing it, you're still in trouble, just not alot of trouble. If you get caught selling it, you're still in trouble, alot of trouble.

I used Portugal as an example to show the possibilities of relaxing drug laws. You can buy several drugs that are illegal in one place legally in another, nowadays even in the US. If drugs were legal, sold by government sanctioned parties, taxed and monitored, purity and safety measured etc. things could be quite a lot better in pretty much every conceivable sense. The only argument against it are either moral or based on a fear of everyone and their mom suddenly starting shooting dope if it ever were made legal. Obviously that's such a controversial idea that no politician would every touch it with a stick. Hell, if I were in politics, I probably wouldn't either.

Your reference above to "buy meth legally" suggests to me that you're envisioning a world where you can walk into the 7-11, and pick up some milk, some bread, a pack of gum, and a vial of meth. That is most definitely NOT what's happening in Portugal, or anywhere in the world. If you're suggesting that would be a "good thing", I think you're out of your mind.

How would it be worse than now? Or even, how would it be worse? How many current meth addicts do you think are struggling with finding a supplier? Would you pick up meth if it were legal? How many people that have never tried meth (or any other hard drug) you know that would?

[BananaStand]

The only major objective property differentiating alcohol from hard drugs is its legal status.

I'm shocked that you believe that. Heroin is addictive immediately, alcoholism develops over a longer period of time. You can have a few drinks and still function like a normal human being. One hit of heroin and you become a vegetable. No single drink will destroy your liver, but every shot of heroin risks a life threatening overdose. The 'but it's the same as alcohol' argument has been pretty well debunked.

You can buy several drugs that are illegal in one place legally in another

Where exactly is there a legal retail market for cocaine, heroin, or meth?

If drugs were legal, sold by government sanctioned parties, taxed and monitored, purity and safety measured etc. things could be quite a lot better in pretty much every conceivable sense.

Huh? When has the government ever proven that it has the ability to run an industry? You're talking about creating a mega-bureaucracy of government regulations regarding street drugs. Can you demonstrate what that would cost, and how tax revenues on drugs would pay for that? What if the price goes up so much that it's just easier for junkies to get "black market drugs". What's stopping the cartels from continuing to ship their product up here, and distribute it at a price that under-cuts the legal retail market?

Or, forget the black market for a minute. What if the surge in prices suppresses demand? Now you'll have legit businesses failing because of gov't regulations.

How many people that have never tried meth (or any other hard drug) you know that would?

You're assuming that a motivation to buy is completely organic. It's not. There's a thing called advertising, and it works. It convinces people that they want or need things that they didn't think they wanted or needed before seeing the advertisement.