View Poll Results: Legalize hard drugs?

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

    28 50.00%
  • No

    28 50.00%
Page 15 of 16 FirstFirst ... 513141516 LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 151

Thread: Legalize Hard Drugs?

  1. #141
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,781

    Re: Legalize Hard Drugs?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gander View Post
    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.
    I disagree. Without a federally mandated manufacturing/distributing law, you would have communities that vote against it needing to police those from other communities who allow it. The infiltration issues would cause more problems for those who bar it and infringe on their rights. Individual communities do NOT live in a vacuum. This is one big reason why I am against anything like this that is not centrally managed and mandated.
    Last edited by CaptainCourtesy; 04-08-10 at 04:43 AM.
    "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"

  2. #142
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,781

    Re: Legalize Hard Drugs?

    Quote Originally Posted by MC Blitzen View Post
    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!
    Ummm... NO. This makes no sense in relation to what we are discussing. And no, marijuana is NOT a "natural, safe, medicine". You are spreading just the type of inaccurate propaganda that hurts the marijuana pro-legalization argument.
    "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"

  3. #143
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 03:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    6,763
    Blog Entries
    2

    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 read your paper on an economically based analysis of drug legalization. It seemed their Pigovian analysis resulted in a recommendation that there be regulated drug legalization.

    One item that came up several times was the question of whether legalization leads to increased drug usage. I posted earlier about a study of Portugal: http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/...post1058671151

  4. #144
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,263

    Re: Legalize Hard Drugs?

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    I disagree. I think we would see a substantial increase.
    Based on speculation.

    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.
    No.3 is questionable in the fact that you assume adequate rationality in obeying the law, yet expect that same "rational person" to lack the same type of analysis when taking a harmful substance (not to consider the addictive/negative health effects).

    The potential for criminality is a deterent for these people.
    Yet you can only speculate on the specific size of this population. Portugal's track record is most interesting when considering hard drug legalization. Under your assumption: when drugs were legalized in Portugal, there would be a substantial increase in the use. And yet...... All reported usage of hard drugs decreased.

    Compared to the European Union and the U.S., Portugal's drug use numbers are impressive. Following decriminalization, Portugal had the lowest rate of lifetime marijuana use in people over 15 in the E.U.: 10%. The most comparable figure in America is in people over 12: 39.8%. Proportionally, more Americans have used cocaine than Portuguese have used marijuana.

    The Cato paper reports that between 2001 and 2006 in Portugal, rates of lifetime use of any illegal drug among seventh through ninth graders fell from 14.1% to 10.6%; drug use in older teens also declined. Lifetime heroin use among 16-to-18-year-olds fell from 2.5% to 1.8% (although there was a slight increase in marijuana use in that age group). New HIV infections in drug users fell by 17% between 1999 and 2003, and deaths related to heroin and similar drugs were cut by more than half. In addition, the number of people on methadone and buprenorphine treatment for drug addiction rose to 14,877 from 6,040, after decriminalization, and money saved on enforcement allowed for increased funding of drug-free treatment as well.
    source

    Without that, ateadt some will use, and with the highly addictive qualities of these substances, one will find a significant increase. Folks don't use meth "every once in a while".
    Only if you assume partial rationality. You can't have it both ways
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  5. #145
    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?

    They don't need drugs in portugal. They have some ass kicking wine there.

  6. #146
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,753

    Re: Legalize Hard Drugs?

    Quote Originally Posted by LiberalAvenger View Post
    They don't need drugs in Portugal. They have some ass kicking wine there.
    Alcohol isn't a drug?
    Education.

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

  7. #147
    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 The Mark View Post
    Alcohol isn't a drug?
    Oh, yeah, but it is really good for you. Fine wine is the nectar of the gods.

  8. #148
    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
    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.
    Yes they focus upon harm minimization strategies, which is simultaneously the most ethical and effective way of approaching the drug problem aside from just educating people for primary prevention. The higher base rate undoubtedly has nothing to do with drug policy, as suggested by the fact that Dutch trends in total users mirrored that of neighboring countries. Yet their approach does reduce the number of problem users, which is the best that can be done.

    I find that hard to believe. The drug itself causes the addictive desire to continue using. This is biochemical.
    That's an oversimplification. It is an interaction between the drug, the method of use, the user, and the social context of use.

    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.
    They could be regulated.

    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.
    Right. And you know what the worst drug in terms of the ratio of people who try it versus people who get addicted? Nicotine.

  9. #149
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Legalize Hard Drugs?

    Quote Originally Posted by reefedjib View Post
    I think we should legalize hard drugs to remove the criminal element from drug distribution and pay for treatment with taxes. Who agrees with me?
    I think we should legalize murder to remove the criminal element.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  10. #150
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 03:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    6,763
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Legalize Hard Drugs?

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    I think we should legalize murder to remove the criminal element.
    What is the similarity between using hard drugs and murder? Got nothing? I didn't think so.

Page 15 of 16 FirstFirst ... 513141516 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
  •