View Poll Results: Legalize hard drugs?

Voters
56. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    28 50.00%
  • No

    28 50.00%
Page 14 of 16 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 151

Thread: Legalize Hard Drugs?

  1. #131
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Legalize Hard Drugs?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gander View Post
    I can't answer these questions because I do not favor a single standard for everyone. I believe state and local governments should regulate drugs in a manner that best suites their specific needs. Eventually, the places with the most effective regulatory frameworks would thrive and serve as an example of how to properly regulate drugs. I don't see why anyone would object to this.
    Ok, in that case.

    What answers to those questions would you support in your state and/or local area?

    And, BTW, who said anything about a single standard?
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  2. #132
    Sage
    The Giant Noodle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Northern Illinois
    Last Seen
    11-03-14 @ 05:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,333

    Re: Legalize Hard Drugs?

    Quote Originally Posted by PonyBoy View Post
    Exactly. Meth is the only reason i would be against 'legal hard drugs'. Meth has literally destroyed entire communities in my state. Meth is one helluva drug...
    what state?
    CORPORATE GREED AND UNION GREED
    DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS
    DESTROYING THE BEST OF AMERICA ONE DAY AT A TIME

    This is the worst kind of discrimination. The kind against ME! ~ Bender

  3. #133
    Advisor LiveUninhibited's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-11-10 @ 03:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    549

    Re: Legalize Hard Drugs?

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    I disagree. I think we would see a substantial increase. There are 3 types of people: 1) those that will use regardless; 2) those that won't use regardless; 3) those whose use will be significantly based on the drug's legality. The potential for criminality is a deterent for these people. Without that, ateadt some will use, and with the highly addictive qualities of these substances, one will find a significant increase.
    Some people, particularly the young, use because it is illegal. But what's more important than how many users there are is how they use it. Prohibitions tend to cause more irresponsible use, which costs society more than casual use.

    The Dutch have liberal drug laws compared to other countries in Europe. Yet the change in use rate patterns follow the same patterns as nearby countries, suggesting that drug use is not dependent upon drug policy. What is different about the Dutch experience is that fewer of their drug users are problem drug users. 1 in 13 of those who use drugs other than marijuana are problem users, compared to an average of 1 in 6 in other European countries.

    Folks don't use meth "every once in a while".
    Actually yes, some do. I have known a few.

    Approximately 80 percent of all drug arrests in Japan involve methamphetamine. The National Police Agency (NPA) estimates there are 600,000 methamphetamine addicts, and between one and three million casual users nationwide.
    Southeast Asia

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Proof really isn't possible in this circumstance. One can presume this logically because of the addictive qualities of these drugs. Heroin, for example, triggers certain parts of the brain that other drugs either do not, or do so in a far lesser capacity. Therefore, logically, we know that as these substances are more addictive, their use increases when the amount of people use them. These drugs are not like alcohol, which can be used recreationally, and without concern for addiction, at least in some.
    Higher addiction rates are partly a consequence of the Iron law of Prohibition. More concentrated forms of a drug tend to lead to greater levels of addiction.

    While it is generally not easy to get addicted to alcohol, once you're hooked it's the worst one. Alcohol is severely physically addictive to the point that trying to quit cold turkey can be life threatening (heroin is similar in this respect). Some hard drugs are barely (cocaine) or not physically addictive (LSD), and people only become addicted to them in the same sense that they can get addicted to sex or gambling. In all cases, there are more casual than hardcore users, though.
    Last edited by LiveUninhibited; 04-07-10 at 09:19 PM.

  4. #134
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Seen
    04-13-10 @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    240

    Re: Legalize Hard Drugs?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    Ok, in that case.

    What answers to those questions would you support in your state and/or local area?

    And, BTW, who said anything about a single standard?
    I would favor Federally imposed standards on manufacturing methods and conditions; product quality; advertising; interstate commerce; and age of consent; I would also support a Federal sales tax (which would accrue revenue from drug use) in lieu of the income tax.

    I would want to see states and localities decide whether or not "hard drugs" could be manufactured and sold in their respective areas. If a community does not want to let people manufacture or distribute meth in their community, then they should be able to restrict that kind of activity. If, however, a community wanted to allow it, they could as long as certain Federal guidelines were adhered to. Over time, the best regulatory framework would emerge.

  5. #135
    Student
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Chinle, Arizona
    Last Seen
    11-29-10 @ 03:28 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    276

    Re: Legalize Hard Drugs?

    Quote Originally Posted by reefedjib View Post
    "externalities" ... "more coercive and authoritarian" ... "your Pigovian solution" ... "the libertarian non-aggression principle" ...

    What?
    An externality is a spillover effect on a party or parties external to a financial transaction; it comes in positive and negative forms. An example of a positive externality would be the effect that individual exterior home renovation had on the property value of surrounding houses. An example of a negative externality would be the effect that air or effluent pollution from an environmentally unsanitary business firm had on the surrounding ecology.

    I refer to negative externalities as authoritarian and coercive because they are essentially impositions on third parties caused by the social cost of a certain activity (such as consumption of hard drugs) exceeding the private cost. For example, spread of secondhand smoke is an instigation of aggression upon external third parties. This is at odds with the libertarian non-aggression principle, which "holds that 'aggression', which is defined as the initiation of physical force, the threat of such, or fraud upon persons or their property, is inherently illegitimate."

    Pigovian taxation is intended to act as a disincentive to the excessive production of negative externalities. For example, a pollution tax effectively raises the production costs of a polluter, optimally to a level where his/her/its private cost matches the social costs of his/her/its activity. Pigovian subsidization, conversely, is intended to incentivize the production of positive externalities.

    I'm not suggesting that this kills the case for legalization/decriminalization of hard drugs, actually. Milton Friedman, hardly a man ignorant of economics, was able to construct an argument in favor of such policy if it was perhaps too reliant on his pre-existing ideological beliefs. And any true defender of property rights would be obligated to consider the [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coase_theorem"]Coase theorem[/ame].

    This paper gives a decent overview of an economically based analysis of drug legalization.

  6. #136
    Devourer of Poor Children
    DrunkenAsparagus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    DC
    Last Seen
    01-20-16 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,496

    Re: Legalize Hard Drugs?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    - I could write you an entire 3 page essay on how I use to be a drug addict, but I won't. What I will say is simply this - nobody goes to jail for a minor possession rap. Maybe in the 80s and maybe early 90s. But in the year 2010? No. You have to do something serious for any cop to want to take the time to do more than simply take drugs away from you.

    If that minor "possession rap" made your girlfriend want to get deeper into drugs, then I guess she didn't learn her lesson now did she? But then again, that is kind of the point - most drug addicts don't - some do - the overwhelming majority don't. It is the reason you see the streets of NYC littered with heroin addicts, crack addicts and meth users.
    You still get a record
    "Doubleplusungood"

    George Orwell

  7. #137
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Last Seen
    04-01-13 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    16,881
    Blog Entries
    19

    Re: Legalize Hard Drugs?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cochise View Post
    An externality is a spillover effect on a party or parties external to a financial transaction; it comes in positive and negative forms. An example of a positive externality would be the effect that individual exterior home renovation had on the property value of surrounding houses. An example of a negative externality would be the effect that air or effluent pollution from an environmentally unsanitary business firm had on the surrounding ecology.

    I refer to negative externalities as authoritarian and coercive because they are essentially impositions on third parties caused by the social cost of a certain activity (such as consumption of hard drugs) exceeding the private cost. For example, spread of secondhand smoke is an instigation of aggression upon external third parties. This is at odds with the libertarian non-aggression principle, which "holds that 'aggression', which is defined as the initiation of physical force, the threat of such, or fraud upon persons or their property, is inherently illegitimate."

    Pigovian taxation is intended to act as a disincentive to the excessive production of negative externalities. For example, a pollution tax effectively raises the production costs of a polluter, optimally to a level where his/her/its private cost matches the social costs of his/her/its activity. Pigovian subsidization, conversely, is intended to incentivize the production of positive externalities.

    I'm not suggesting that this kills the case for legalization/decriminalization of hard drugs, actually. Milton Friedman, hardly a man ignorant of economics, was able to construct an argument in favor of such policy if it was perhaps too reliant on his pre-existing ideological beliefs. And any true defender of property rights would be obligated to consider the Coase theorem.

    This paper gives a decent overview of an economically based analysis of drug legalization.
    I think so too.

  8. #138
    Air Biscuits for Everyone
    Pull My Finger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    06-03-12 @ 12:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,070
    Blog Entries
    30

    Re: Legalize Hard Drugs?

    Quote Originally Posted by OrlandoGringo View Post
    ...Addicts commit crimes to pay for their addiction and then give their ill-gotten money to the pushers.
    Not sure how I feel on the subject.

    Devils advocate...

    They will still be giving money, even if it's to different 'pushers'.

    This doesn't seem to positively impact the crimes committed in order to get the money to pay for their habit.

    It seems plausible that legalization would increase the amount of users, likely adding to the number of people committing crimes to pay for their habits.

    User crime could rise, not fall.

    I haven't considered the big picture though...

    Peace

    EDIT: lol, I just checked into the thread a little deeper - I'm a little out of my league...
    Last edited by Pull My Finger; 04-08-10 at 04:15 AM.
    My eyes are always open, habitat gropin'...

  9. #139
    User
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Seen
    04-08-10 @ 04:53 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3

    Re: Legalize Hard Drugs?

    the value of drugs is worse than the drugs...
    the incentive for drug manufacturers is money, and if we made sure that drugs were accessible to addicts for FREE, the market of drugs would be sabotaged... and nurses could be administering to 'the sick' rather than drug pushers....and the sick wouldn't be compromising everything for the next 'fix'
    Marijuana needs to be used as a Great Ally in our societies' 'war on drugs'...it's a natural, safe medicine, let's be honest now...doctors everywhere study it and know it to be the truth...
    DEVALUE DRUGS! stop making them scarce....sabotage the black market with free drugs!
    smoke weed if you want to get high, nothing else is required..even alcohol is wack, in comparison....it's just not natural....wake up people!

  10. #140
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,711

    Re: Legalize Hard Drugs?

    Quote Originally Posted by LiveUninhibited View Post
    Some people, particularly the young, use because it is illegal. But what's more important than how many users there are is how they use it. Prohibitions tend to cause more irresponsible use, which costs society more than casual use.
    The types of drugs we are discussing tend to cause more irresponsible use.

    The Dutch have liberal drug laws compared to other countries in Europe. Yet the change in use rate patterns follow the same patterns as nearby countries, suggesting that drug use is not dependent upon drug policy. What is different about the Dutch experience is that fewer of their drug users are problem drug users. 1 in 13 of those who use drugs other than marijuana are problem users, compared to an average of 1 in 6 in other European countries.
    The Dutch do distinguish between "soft" and "hard" drugs, with marijuana rate as a "soft" drug, whereas the drugs we are discussing are "hard" drugs. They have found that those who use hard drugs use them at a higher rate than other countries, but those that become "problem" users are at a lower rate. This however may not be a reaction to the drug laws, but a reaction to the policy of treating problem users. 90% of all users who want detoxification treatment receive it on the government's dime. This fits in with what I have suggested. This is a better indicator of folks who are not problem users than the more liberal drug policies... which are not as liberal as you might think, but are just not enforced as stringently.



    Actually yes, some do. I have known a few.
    I find that hard to believe. The drug itself causes the addictive desire to continue using. This is biochemical.



    Southeast Asia



    Higher addiction rates are partly a consequence of the Iron law of Prohibition. More concentrated forms of a drug tend to lead to greater levels of addiction.
    I disagree. Higher addiction rates are a result of the drug themselves and their addictive quality. Further, there are two schools of thought here. Those who create and "cut" these drugs could create a more potent form to keep the user addicted, or a less potent form so that they can sell a higher quantity. There is no reason to believe that those who would produce it legally would not use either of these scenarios for the same reason.

    While it is generally not easy to get addicted to alcohol, once you're hooked it's the worst one. Alcohol is severely physically addictive to the point that trying to quit cold turkey can be life threatening (heroin is similar in this respect). Some hard drugs are barely (cocaine) or not physically addictive (LSD), and people only become addicted to them in the same sense that they can get addicted to sex or gambling. In all cases, there are more casual than hardcore users, though.
    If we talk quantity, it takes far less heroin to be addicted than it does alcohol, and a smaller percentage of folks who use the latter will succumb. This would translate into higher usage per user and because of a higher addiction rate, more problems that relate to the disease itself.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

Page 14 of 16 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •