• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A Proposal for Legalizing all Recreational Drugs

Regarding your support for Oftencold's Rec. Drug Legalization Proposal:

  • I support Oftencold's Rec. Drug Legalization Proposal

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I do not support Oftencold's Rec. Drug Legalization Proposal

    Votes: 13 76.5%

  • Oftencold's Rec. Drug Legalization Proposal is too harsh

    Votes: 5 29.4%

  • Oftencold's Rec. Drug Legalization Proposal in to lenient

    Votes: 3 17.6%

  • I am a drug dealer

    Votes: 1 5.9%

  • I am a drug user

    Votes: 3 17.6%
  • Total voters
    17
Meth cannot be made safe.

But who would ever use meth, if they could have cocaine?
 
Oftencold said:
I think that Meth is cheaper. I've certainly known people who used cocaine of one type or another. I couldn't see that it did much for them.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah. It's cheaper, mainly because it can be made from common, legal chemicals, while cocaine must be made from illegal plants that only grow in tropical places.

Besides, if the bulk of an item's price is taxes, what is to stop cocaine from being cheaper than meth? Assuming, of course, that with cheap cocaine available anyone would choose meth, even if it were that little bit cheaper.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
Well, yeah. It's cheaper, mainly because it can be made from common, legal chemicals, while cocaine must be made from illegal plants that only grow in tropical places.

Besides, if the bulk of an item's price is taxes, what is to stop cocaine from being cheaper than meth? Assuming, of course, that with cheap cocaine available anyone would choose meth, even if it were that little bit cheaper.
Click to expand...
Oh, of course people would choose to use Meth because it is racier, morre dangerous, and to some, therefore more sexy.

People pierce there tongues for cryin' out loud -- somebody will do almost anything.

There will always be people who do insane things because they think that normalcy is dull, and an infringement of their rights/.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
Meth cannot be made safe.

But who would ever use meth, if they could have cocaine?
Click to expand...

There are similar drugs currently available via prescription such as adderall.
 
Addictive drugs are bad for the brain, we know that, but they are highly concentrated versions and forms of simple plants, taken by people who seek for some reason excessive amounts of dopamine, probably because their dopamine supply has been exhausted from the rigors and overwork of working for someone else, and not benefitting, only sustaining. This can wreak havoc on the mind, leading unusual or un logical decisions. they are abusing the coca and poppy plants, extracting them, and using them for a quick rush. if these plants were allowed to grow, they would not be used in such an excessive and wild manner,
and the great people of the village would become accustomed, and experienced with them, probably chewing them for a buzz, but not mainlining it for there is no reason for mainlining the drug, when it grows in abundance. People have personal choice, influenced by their peers, friends and family, on whether to use, or whether to be responsible with it. also forced taxation for anything without consent is a violation of the laws of the republic of the united states (republic, for which it stands which means my rights and laws are written once, and cannot be voted away by some ranting cattle majority.
 
Dezaad said:
Your thorough examination really does show here. I have, in the past, been for the legalization of all drugs. However, assertion 4 from your points has made me reconsider. If your assertion is true (as far as "permanently alter the user's personality whether they are using or not in a way that is provably dangerous to the public"), then I may end up changing my mind.

However, let me offer this anecdote: A couple that are very close to me ended up becoming addicted to Meth. The guy was very charming and had a very good job where he was fast working his way up. The gal was an RN. They had a nice middle class house.

Eventually, he lost his job and started to manufacture and sell the drug. He became what most would call a dangerous criminal. There were guns and supposedly some violence, though I do not know the details on this, as I had been dissassociating from them. Even from a distance, the things I was hearing scared me. Well, finally he was arrested and charged with several things, I don't recall what all. He went to prison and his gal was rumored to have taken over the business.

When the police came for her, the neighbors all stood out on their front lawns in their nice cul-de-sac and cheered. However, the police had entered her home without probable cause, without a warrant and without her permission. So, it ended up that no charge they could bring against her would stick.

Fortunately (or unfortunately from another perspective) her daughter's juvenile dilinquency (big suprise there, eh?) made it possible for a judge to require the mother to undergo drug testing, and the judge then ordered inpatient rehab. This was possible under a state law that gives a juvenile judge certain powers over the adult responsible for a dilinquent minor.

Amazingly, the rehab worked. Meanwhile the boyfriend, now in prison, was also involved in "Recovery".

It has now been many years since his release. He is very successful as a high level manager in his career. She has regained her nursing license and another advanced degree in nursing, and is well respected wherever she works. They were both extremely addicted to Meth. If you met them, they would appear to you in every way as if they were always the way they are now. Nearly everyone likes them.

I am telling this story partly in contemplation in considering your claim that Meth causes irreversible damage to the personalities of people which causes those people to be permanently dangerous to society. Are there studies which back this up? Perhaps you have an anecdote which contradicts this one I have told. Or did you mean to say that these people are a danger as long as the addictive behavior is active?
Click to expand...
I am glad that this anecdotal couple were able to overcome that. Hopefully there will be more advances in treatment, but I have known some crack and meth addicts who weren't so lucky, it's such a rotten life, the thing that gets me though is how dangerous those drugs make it for innocents in society.
 
Oftencold said:
Why do you do this? You should know by know that I will probably overwhelm you with sources. Oh well.
Click to expand...
I don't mind at all. However, these sources really say nothing about the rate of damage, per se. The most useful information in them whereby rate of brain function decay could be speculated about would be the information on the average length of time the users had been using (10 years) and how much they used, on average. The 'ten years' information was new for me, so thank you for that. As for the heaviness of the use, I can't imagine that the self-reporting with regard to that is very accurate. I just doubt the users themselves know with any degree of accuracy. Nevertheless information is better than no information, in my view as long as we're thorough in our skepticism.

In any case, reviewing the information has contributed to my reticence about advocating for legalization. The drug does seem so extremely addictive and the damage so surprisingly extensive that I am just not sure that we can simply allow it.

In my view, the people starting up the use of it would have to be either ignorant or insane. In either case, perhaps we should protect them from themselves. In a later post you mention anecdotal reasons why people do start up. My experience has been different than yours. The people I know (and I do know considerably more than just the people whose story I told) started using either because of self-medicating for depression or because they just wanted to have a little fun and thought it would be safe to use every once in a while.

Alot of people don't know or don't believe the stories about how addictive it is. They see people having a great time, and by the time those people have sunk into oblivion, they are out of sight of the normal social venues. Many people seem not to have the skills or the know how concerning how to evaluate scientific and medical claims; and when they've never seen it first hand, it is simply not credible (to them). I class these people as ignorant, and not necessarily wilfully so. I feel sorry for them mostly.
 
therealrelation said:
. . .if these plants were allowed to grow, they would not be used in such an excessive and wild manner,
and the great people of the village would become accustomed, and experienced with them, probably chewing them for a buzz, but not mainlining it for there is no reason for mainlining the drug, when it grows in abundance. People have personal choice, influenced by their peers, friends and family, . . .
Click to expand...
So, if these plants were allowed to grow freely, they would not be abused. Much the same way that tobacco, hops, yeast, and grapes are not abused.




(This is sarcasm.)
 
Oftencold said:
So, if these plants were allowed to grow freely, they would not be abused. Much the same way that tobacco, hops, yeast, and grapes are not abused.

(This is sarcasm.)
Click to expand...

People don't kill each other over cigarettes. 7-11 employees and Speedway employees don't have turf wars to determine who gets to sell alcohol in each city.

If drugs were legalized, the black market would be eliminated and the vast majority of drug-related crimes would vanish overnight.
 
Kandahar said:
If drugs were legalized, the black market would be eliminated and the vast majority of drug-related crimes would vanish overnight.
Click to expand...

I believe this would eventually happen but not overnight. Production would still have to shift to legal sources, and with regulation I still believe only certain companies would be given licensing rights to product these narcotics. No government would ever allow such a shift unless it was getting a piece of the profit.

In order for something to be taxed effectively it still has to be controlled by a select group. It would still be illegal for you to grow it yourself or produce it yourself because that would be escaping the taxation process. This would be that instead of the war on drugs, you have a war on people escaping taxation... it would just shift to the battle to a different realm.

Also, government anything is crap, sorry to say. In Canada, they have fields of pot growing in Manitoba for medical users... but as most medical users will tell you, government pot is crap. Most users still turn to illegal dealers to get their medication. I would only be in favor of legalization if it meant I could grow any of these plants myself without penalty or fine, then I could control the strength, quantity and quality myself.
 
I'm completely in favor of legalizing the use, possession, cultivation, manufacturing, distribution, and sale of all drugs. Just slap a surgeon general's warning on them, make sure stores aren't selling them to minors, and institute whatever tax the government decides. Aside from that, most drugs don't really need a great deal of regulation.

I would make exceptions for drugs that make people exceptionally violent, like PCP. In cases like those, I think it should be legal in controlled environments where medical professionals can assist people and security guards can subdue people if necessary, but I don't necessarily think it should be legal just anywhere.
 
Kandahar said:
I'm completely in favor of legalizing the use, possession, cultivation, manufacturing, distribution, and sale of all drugs. Just slap a surgeon general's warning on them, make sure stores aren't selling them to minors, and institute whatever tax the government decides. Aside from that, most drugs don't really need a great deal of regulation.

I would make exceptions for drugs that make people exceptionally violent, like PCP. In cases like those, I think it should be legal in controlled environments where medical professionals can assist people and security guards can subdue people if necessary, but I don't necessarily think it should be legal just anywhere.
Click to expand...

Would have to put in about 1000% tax revenue to cover treatment costs and help offset economic and social damage.:shock::doh:doh:doh
 
I think it's important to discuss whether drug use will actually increase if drugs are legalized, because many of the opinions here seem to be assuming that will be the case.

If we legalize drugs and then drug use increases, then we have failed to implement the right policies IMO. If we assume that the rate of drug use will remain about the same as it is now, then legalization would solve all the problems that have already been noted, without causing any other problems for individuals or society that don't already exist.

Legalize should not mean glamorize. It should mean treat the drug problem as a medical problem, instead of a criminal problem. There should still be a strong focus on educating people about the dangers of drug use and addiction. But instead of a propaganda campaign full of lies and hyperbole like DARE and the DEA do, education should be honest and objective about the facts so that it maintains credibility - especially with kids. That's how to legalize drugs without having an influx of new addicts.

Orius said:
In order for something to be taxed effectively it still has to be controlled by a select group. It would still be illegal for you to grow it yourself or produce it yourself because that would be escaping the taxation process. This would be that instead of the war on drugs, you have a war on people escaping taxation... it would just shift to the battle to a different realm.
Click to expand...
Well anyone can grow their own tobacco and brew their own beer, hell you can even order everything you need online. But those industries are still "taxed effectively" don't you think? So why would you believe this could be a problem with other drugs?

Dezaad said:
In any case, reviewing the information has contributed to my reticence about advocating for legalization. The drug does seem so extremely addictive and the damage so surprisingly extensive that I am just not sure that we can simply allow it.
Click to expand...
To me, this sounds like the same non-sequitor that argues for any drug to be illegal in the first place. The whole idea that addictive and dangerous drugs should be illegal fails to recognize the nature of the problem as a medical one, not a criminal one. It's like trying to tighten a bolt by using a hammer. The law books are categorically not the right tool for addressing this problem.

Oftencold said:
There will always be people who do insane things because they think that normalcy is dull, and an infringement of their rights/.
Click to expand...
So true!
 
Kandahar said:
People don't kill each other over cigarettes. . . .
Click to expand...


To casually demolish your assertion:
MURDER OVER CIGARETTES.; One Italian Dead, Another Wounded in Brooklyn Street Row.
April 2, 1911, Sunday


When Giuseppe Spizzano of 43 Sackett Street, Brooklyn, was charged in the Hamilton Street Station last evening with the killing of one man and the wounding of another, he told the Lieutenant that it was all due to a quarrel over a five-cent package of cigarettes.
Click to expand...
Argument over Cigarette leads to Murder
Witnesses told police that the two men argued over the cigarette before Scheinkman allegedly attacked the victim with his fists and feet. The victim’s name is being withheld pending notification of next of kin.
Click to expand...
Police: Argument over cigarettes leads to choke hold, then murder
Tampa, Florida - Tampa police say a fight between roommates over cigarettes turned deadly Tuesday morning.
Click to expand...
Friends say latest murder victim killed over a cigarette
Friends of a man who was killed following a confrontation along 118th Avenue Sunday morning say he was stabbed on the steps of a liquor store after refusing to give two men a cigarette.
Click to expand...
Youth Kills Boy, 4, Over Cigarettes, Police Say
A 15-year-old youth shot a 4-year-old to death inside a home methamphetamine lab because the younger boy didn’t get cigarettes fast enough, police said Monday.
Click to expand...
Briton murdered in Denmark 'over cigarette'
A British man was stabbed to death in Copenhagen early this morning after an apparent argument over a cigarette.


The victim, who has not been named, was knifed "many, many times" in a sudden fight, according to Danish police. The attack, which happened shortly before dawn, was witnessed by several onlookers and a 32-year-old Danish man was arrested nearby. He has been charged with murder.
Click to expand...
Boy jailed in row over cigarette
The boy, who had been thrown out of the house, shouted and smashed windows before stabbing Mr Davies through the heart, Manchester Crown Court heard.
Click to expand...
Exclusive: 12 years for killer who strangled girlfriend with stockings over cigarette row
A MAN who strangled his girlfriend with her stockings was jailed for at least 12 years yesterday.


Mark Ferguson killed Elizabeth Hunter in bed after she accused him of smoking their last cigarette.
Click to expand...
The reason that we have so many crimes and murders involving this legal drug, is that it simply is not lethal enough.
 
Last edited:
creativedreams said:
Would have to put in about 1000% tax revenue to cover treatment costs and help offset economic and social damage.:shock::doh:doh:doh
Click to expand...

What makes you think that legalizing drugs will cause "economic and social damage"? That seems to be premised on the assumption that more people will use (and abuse) drugs if they are legal...an assumption for which I see absolutely no evidence. Gang-related crime will decline dramatically as there is no longer a need for turf wars. Random acts of robbery and burglary will decline dramatically as people no longer need to steal in order to finance their addictions. People could seek help for their problem more openly without being treated as criminals. And overdoses would become rare because actual businesses could guarantee the purity of their drugs. "Gateway drugs" would cease to be a gateway to anything, because people wouldn't have to rely on criminals to provide them.

Etc, etc.

Many drugs are bad themselves...but it's the war on drugs that causes most of the economic and social damage.
 
Oftencold said:
To casually demolish your assertion:
The reason that we have so many crimes and murders involving this legal drug, is that it simply is not lethal enough.
Click to expand...

OK, want to compare the number of cigarette-related murders with the number of cocaine-related murders? :doh

I'm not talking about random isolated cases you googled. That is nothing compared to the tens of thousands of murders each year related to illegal drugs.
 
Kandahar said:
OK, want to compare the number of cigarette-related murders with the number of cocaine-related murders? :doh

I'm not talking about random isolated cases you googled. That is nothing compared to the tens of thousands of murders each year related to illegal drugs.
Click to expand...
Actually, my rather effective purpose was to demonstrate that you are making assertions (people don't murder over cigarettes,) that can be almost effortlessly refuted.

I believe also, (and I'm not going to do the research for you,) that you might discover that over 50 years there have been more cigarette murders in America that Cocaine murders.

By the way too, It took very a minimal effort to find the murders I did cite in devastating your contention. The results to the search were manifold.
 
Last edited:
Oftencold said:
Actually, my rather effective purpose was to demonstrate that you are making assertions (people don't murder over cigarettes,) that can be almost effortlessly refuted.
Click to expand...

Fine, allow me to rephrase (i.e. idiot-proof) my statement: People don't murder over cigarettes in significant numbers. Care to refute that?

Oftencold said:
I believe also, (and I'm not going to do the research for you,) that you might discover that over 50 years there have been more cigarette murders in America that Cocaine murders.
Click to expand...

And I believe you know perfectly well that that's full of ****. I doubt I can even FIND statistics on the number of cigarette-related murders per year, because they're so unusual and isolated that no one probably bothers to even KEEP statistics on them.

Oftencold said:
By the way too, It took very a minimal effort to find the murders I did cite in devastating your contention. The results to the search were manifold.
Click to expand...

Did you actually want to discuss the war on drugs, or did you just want to split hairs when you understood what I meant perfectly well?
 
Kandahar said:
What makes you think that legalizing drugs will cause "economic and social damage"? That seems to be premised on the assumption that more people will use (and abuse) drugs if they are legal...an assumption for which I see absolutely no evidence. Gang-related crime will decline dramatically as there is no longer a need for turf wars. Random acts of robbery and burglary will decline dramatically as people no longer need to steal in order to finance their addictions. People could seek help for their problem more openly without being treated as criminals. And overdoses would become rare because actual businesses could guarantee the purity of their drugs. "Gateway drugs" would cease to be a gateway to anything, because people wouldn't have to rely on criminals to provide them.

Etc, etc.

Many drugs are bad themselves...but it's the war on drugs that causes most of the economic and social damage.
Click to expand...

drug use would spread like the plague through parental influence, advertising, etc. (common sense:doh)

studies show if you put an electical charge between a mouse and it's food and gradually increase the electrical charge for each feeding time...the mouse will reach a point where it will not go to obtain the food.

replace that food with a drug, and the mouse will continue to go to obtain the drug until it dies.

How this relates is that when a person runs out of money to get food they will not risk life in prison to obtain the food

when a person runs out of money to get a drug they will risk life in prison to obtain the drug.:doh

If you can't grasp this then......well.......sorry:doh
 
creativedreams said:
drug use would spread like the plague through parental influence, advertising, etc. (common sense:doh)
Click to expand...
As I already said. If we legalize drugs and then drug use increases, then we have failed to implement the right policies.

Legalize should not mean glamorize. It should mean treat the drug problem as a medical problem, instead of a criminal problem. There should still be a strong focus on educating people about the dangers of drug use and addiction. But instead of a propaganda campaign full of lies and hyperbole like DARE and the DEA do, education should be honest and objective about the facts so that it maintains credibility - especially with kids. That's how to legalize drugs without having an influx of new addicts.

creativedreams said:
studies show if you put an electical charge between a mouse and it's food and gradually increase the electrical charge for each feeding time...the mouse will reach a point where it will not go to obtain the food.

replace that food with a drug, and the mouse will continue to go to obtain the drug until it dies.

How this relates is that when a person runs out of money to get food they will not risk life in prison to obtain the food

when a person runs out of money to get a drug they will risk life in prison to obtain the drug.:doh

If you can't grasp this then......well.......sorry:doh
Click to expand...
Nothing you said here is any different when drugs are legal vs. illegal. If you can't grasp that, then...well...I'm sorry too!
 
Binary_Digit said:
As I already said. If we legalize drugs and then drug use increases, then we have failed to implement the right policies.

Legalize should not mean glamorize. It should mean treat the drug problem as a medical problem, instead of a criminal problem. There should still be a strong focus on educating people about the dangers of drug use and addiction. But instead of a propaganda campaign full of lies and hyperbole like DARE and the DEA do, education should be honest and objective about the facts so that it maintains credibility - especially with kids. That's how to legalize drugs without having an influx of new addicts.


Nothing you said here is any different when drugs are legal vs. illegal. If you can't grasp that, then...well...I'm sorry too!
Click to expand...

I truely do feel sorry for your whole thought process of somehow trying to rationalize and defend making drugs legal........period

Look up faces of meth and how addictive and detiorating it is both physically and mentally.
Read how so many people regret ever trying it and can't stop.
Think about how if it was readily available how many kids might experiment once, and be addicted for life.................WTF!....grow a braincell or two!
 
creativedreams said:
I truely do feel sorry for your whole thought process of somehow trying to rationalize and defend making drugs legal........period
Click to expand...
Well, I feel sorry that you completely ignore that thought process instead of addressing it, and still claim that drugs should remain illegal because they are bad in spite of overwhelming evidence that the drug problem is actually made worse under prohibition, not better.

creativedreams said:
Look up faces of meth and how addictive and detiorating it is both physically and mentally.
Read how so many people regret ever trying it and can't stop.
Think about how if it was readily available how many kids might experiment once, and be addicted for life.................WTF!....grow a braincell or two!
Click to expand...
Those are all good reasons why they shouldn't be used. Not one of them is a good reason why they should be illegal.
 
creativedreams said:
Think about how if it was readily available how many kids might experiment once, and be addicted for life.................WTF!....grow a braincell or two!
Click to expand...
Think about the fact that high school kids consistently report that it's easier to get weed than beer, and many even say it's easier to get weed than cigarettes.

Now think about why that is.
 
Binary_Digit said:
Think about the fact that high school kids consistently report that it's easier to get weed than beer, and many even say it's easier to get weed than cigarettes.

Now think about why that is.
Click to expand...

I appoligize for letting myself get overpassionate and deteriorating the discussion by lowering the choice and manner of words I use. Looks like on this topic we may have to agree to disagree, although I may do a little more research and re-address this.:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom