• 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!

Legalize Hard Drugs?

Legalize hard drugs?


  • Total voters
    47
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?

No, absolutely not. They are destructive even with moderate use.

Decriminalization is more practical. Fine people for small possession but continue going after the cartels and dealers. The idea would be to free up the justice and penitentiary systems from being overloaded with small time offenders.
 
I look at hard drugs the same way as I look at prescription medication. These substances are substantially more dangerous than "over the counter" drugs... in illegal drug-speak, to me, that would be alcohol and marijuana. The danger level associated with someone having free access to Xanax or morphine is significantly higher than someone having free access to aspirin. The former cause considerable more significant effects. This is the same as substances such as cocaine, heroin, or meth. Further, making these substances legal but only prescription-based also makes no sense, as the negative effects of the drugs FAR outweigh the positive effects, and there are other substances that perform the positive effects more efficiently and with fewer of the negatives.

In my view, when it comes to these substances, the problems that would be caused by the legalization would FAR outweigh to positives.
 
In my view, when it comes to these substances, the problems that would be caused by the legalization would FAR outweigh to positives.

Are you including the elimination of the black market in your list of positives?
 
Are you including the elimination of the black market in your list of positives?

Not really. In this case, the black market would be far less something eliminated. oxycodone and morphine are legal, though controlled, and the black market with them is still significant. Making these substances legal and free for use similar to alcohol is irresponsible and dangerous, and making them prescription released offers no benefits to current drugs on the market, and does not eliminate black market selling.
 
And even if the black market were eliminated, the negatives would still outweigh this positive.
 
And even if the black market were eliminated, the negatives would still outweigh this positive.

You are basing this off the premise that drug use (hard drugs) would increase by a substantial percentage. However, i do not believe it functions @ 1:1.
 
Like I said, drug abuse is first a social/health issue. It is also a criminal issue because drugs (at least the one's we're discussing) are illegal. Their legal status makes them more difficult to obtain and, as a result, substantially drives up their cost to purchase.

Prescription meds (oxycotin, etc.) are legal only when prescribed by a doctor. For everyone else they are illegal. Thus, there is a black market for them and they are valuable.

We have been fighting a "drug war" that has enriched countless street pushers, filled our prisons and emptied our state and local budgets.

Alcohol is legal and we have our share of alcoholics. However, most of us could drink a bottle of whiskey every single night and it would be perfectly legal, but we don't. If meth were legal the overwhelming majority of us would not ingest it.

Legalized drugs would put the bad guys out of business. No? Ok, how many illegal beer operations are there in the U.S.? Exactly. The mom-and-pop beer operator cannot compete with the big boys and neither would the black market. Would you rather drink a can of Miller Lite or some concoction brewed up in some dude's basement? Meth is notorious for containing God-knows-what. A user would buy from a reputable seller (Walgreens) and know their product is "pure" and pay a cheaper price for it rather than buy from guy in a trailer and pay substantially more for it.

We bring the drug abuse out of the shadows and into the light. We put the bad guys out of business and give the users an opportunity to get help. When they walk into Walgreens and purchase their meth they can be educated and encouraged to seek help.

In the meantime, our prisons will remain full, the pushers will continue to be enriched and our police will be overburdened and underfunded. It's time to change this failed policy.
 
Legalized drugs would put the bad guys out of business. No? Ok, how many illegal beer operations are there in the U.S.? Exactly.

tell me, under prohibition, was trading in illegal alcohol worth $321.6 billion world wide?

the two are incomparable
 
tell me, under prohibition, was trading in illegal alcohol worth $321.6 billion world wide?

the two are incomparable

No, the concept is the same.

How many Californians with licenses to buy prescription pot are still buying it from their local pusher?
 
No, the concept is the same.

How many Californians with licenses to buy prescription pot are still buying it from their local pusher?

before they could get it legally, how much of their marijuana was being shipped in from south america by drug cartels as opposed to being grown locally?
 
I wonder how many people who are for legalizing hard drugs have ever had an addict in their family that they themselves have had to deal with.
 
I wonder how many people who are for legalizing hard drugs have ever had an addict in their family that they themselves have had to deal with.

shhh, dont tell 'em that, or they might realise that making it legal doesn't take away the ill effects
 
No, the concept is the same.

How many Californians with licenses to buy prescription pot are still buying it from their local pusher?

How much cheaper did pot become?
 
shhh, dont tell 'em that, or they might realise that making it legal doesn't take away the ill effects

Or maybe we've dealt with an addict. Or was one ourselves. And still happen to think that people should be free to make those choices for themselves.
 
Or maybe we've dealt with an addict. Or was one ourselves. And still happen to think that people should be free to make those choices for themselves.

i have no problem with whole adult choice argument, i don't agree with it, but i have no problem with it, the problem i have is with the people who seem to think legalising it will stop the cartels, stop drug fueled crimes, stop wrecked lives, and generally take away the negative effects of hard drugs.
 
Not really. In this case, the black market would be far less something eliminated. oxycodone and morphine are legal, though controlled, and the black market with them is still significant. Making these substances legal and free for use similar to alcohol is irresponsible and dangerous, and making them prescription released offers no benefits to current drugs on the market, and does not eliminate black market selling.

And even if the black market were eliminated, the negatives would still outweigh this positive.

I was thinking differently but perhaps you are right. I can see your argument more with heroin and meth than coke, based on their addictiveness.

I was thinking they would be available as alcohol and weed, once that is legalized, and not like prescription drugs which does result in a black market. I am taking the libertarian argument here, as long as you take responsibility for the consequences, you should be free to use.

I was thinking they are more harmful being illegal than they would be being legal. I am assuming that their rates of use would not go up appreciably.
 
And subtropical areas as well as other countries that compete.

Again what would stop those countries or even companies here from outsourcing to the cartels.

Cartels aren't street gangs

I think most people know that. They are something much worse.


What would the law enforcement go after? The stuff is legal. The government wouldn't run it.

Cartels do not just sell drugs, they are not the illegal drug version of Anheuser-Busch.

Considering the fact Mexico is a dirt poor 3rd world country replacements are probably not that expensive.

Do you think these thugs the cartels hire are going to be millionaires?


Call me crazy, but I think that when you're taking on a nations sizable military, you're using a good amount of resources.

The vast majority of times stolen and illegal goods are much cheaper than their legal counterparts. Here in the US a preban machine can get expensive due to availability, however those bans do not exist to criminals organizations and in certain countries.


Of course not, but it is their most significant source of revenue.

And it will continue to be their significant source of income. Is the government going to grow the stuff and hand it out for free or for a dirt cheap price?

THEY WOULD HAVE NO MONEY TO GO AGAINST THEM WITH
Yes they would.Unless the federal government is growing and making the stuff themselves and handing it out for free or for a dirt cheap price the cartels are still going to make lots of money. Because the price of those drugs are not going to magically drop,so there is still lots of money to be made from it. Did the price of pot magically drop in states with legalized medicinal marijuana? From what I understand it didn't.


18,000 murders in Mexico a year is not an improvement by any means. Also, I don't see this as a reason to not lower violence more in the US.


The violence here in the US usually only affects those who deal with the stuff so I am not worried about it.
 
i have no problem with whole adult choice argument, i don't agree with it, but i have no problem with it, the problem i have is with the people who seem to think legalising it will stop the cartels, stop drug fueled crimes, stop wrecked lives, and generally take away the negative effects of hard drugs.

Drugs are here and will remain. How we manage the problem is what needs to change. Until that happens, expect the same.
 
the problem i have is with the people who seem to think legalising it will stop the cartels, stop drug fueled crimes, stop wrecked lives, and generally take away the negative effects of hard drugs.

How could it not stop cartels? All of the revenue stream for these drugs will be going to legitimate enterprises, for the production and distribution of these hard drugs. The cartels won't be making any money.

There may still be drug fueled crime, as addicts try to get the money for their next fix. Those folks need rehab treatment. Something creative must be done - perhaps trade a fix for entry into rehab.

Wrecked lives will continue as they do today.

There is no way to remove the negative effects of hard drugs.
 
Again what would stop those countries or even companies here from outsourcing to the cartels.

Transaction costs, productivity, quality.

Cartels do not just sell drugs, they are not the illegal drug version of Anheuser-Busch.

You are correct! Due to the illegality, they are far more "active" (in regards to process management) than Anheuser-Busch. Cartels are also less likely to follow the law:wow:

The vast majority of times stolen and illegal goods are much cheaper than their legal counterparts. Here in the US a preban machine can get expensive due to availability, however those bans do not exist to criminals organizations and in certain countries.

This is a constant aspect of criminality. Sometimes it is cigarettes, other times it is jewelry. But just so it is clear; there is still theft in illegal drug markets. I am going to assume the current "black market" level exceeds a legal and regulated level. Why? Calling the police to report stolen cocaine receives only a negative response.

And it will continue to be their significant source of income.

Agreed. Now there will be less "traffic" in prisons, courtrooms, and squad cars. More police available (because they are no longer looking to bust minor drug sales) to address theft. Not just for the theft in hard drugs, but everything that is stolen. To claim theft will increase in proportion to the drug industry is impossible to support.

Is the government going to grow the stuff and hand it out for free or for a dirt cheap price?

Why would it? They can however tax it (being ever so careful not to tax it back into black markets).

Yes they would.Unless the federal government is growing and making the stuff themselves and handing it out for free or for a dirt cheap price the cartels are still going to make lots of money. Because the price of those drugs are not going to magically drop,so there is still lots of money to be made from it. Did the price of pot magically drop in states with legalized medicinal marijuana? From what I understand it didn't.

The cartels will be phased out (long term) via innovation and new equilibrium pricing schedules (supply determinant). One of the current issues is purity; people really do not know what they are getting. A regulated industry would eliminate the majority of these instances (reducing overdose, poisoning, hospital visits) through competition. The cost of producing an ounce of pure heroin is nowhere near its illicit market price (greater than $2k/oz). Sheer competition will bring down these profit margins. Other cost aspects such as intercontinental trafficking (soldiers, subs, airplanes) would phase out in favor of less costly, and more efficient means.

Tell me what business you know of has a 1000% profit margin.

The violence here in the US usually only affects those who deal with the stuff so I am not worried about it.

Yet you complain about taxes. The war on drugs (and the violence associated) cost more than $20 billion last year. With great results signaling money well spent. So yes, you are paying for it one way or another.
 
I think there are a lot of serious consequences which can come with the legalization of hard drugs. Especially if you start allowing the pharmaceutical companies and wall street in on it. Designer drugs can be made which can be nearly instantly addicting. On the same accord, I say that if someone wants to do that to themselves, who am I to say no? With something like nationalized healthcare (well even before, we still subsidized emergency care), the rest of us will bear the cost somewhat, but whatever. It's either ban all drugs and harmful products because of that (like alcohol, tobacco, certain sugars, fats, etc) or accept the fact that we'll pay for it so that people are still free to make the choice.
 
How could it not stop cartels? All of the revenue stream for these drugs will be going to legitimate enterprises, for the production and distribution of these hard drugs. The cartels won't be making any money.

There may still be drug fueled crime, as addicts try to get the money for their next fix. Those folks need rehab treatment. Something creative must be done - perhaps trade a fix for entry into rehab.

Wrecked lives will continue as they do today.

There is no way to remove the negative effects of hard drugs.

how do you propose to make the cartels go along with this?

like i've said, if you go directly to the growers, the cartels aren't above threatening them with violent reprisals for selling to americans, if you produce it wholly in america, the cost would be great that the cartels could simply undercut the governments price.
 
how do you propose to make the cartels go along with this?

like i've said, if you go directly to the growers, the cartels aren't above threatening them with violent reprisals for selling to americans, if you produce it wholly in america, the cost would be great that the cartels could simply undercut the governments price.

Well if it were X amount of coke from the gas station for 50 buck or X amount of coke from some shady ass drug dealer I'd have to meet somehow for 40 dollars....I may just go ahead and go to the gas station. So there's that to consider as well.
 
Well if it were X amount of coke from the gas station for 50 buck or X amount of coke from some shady ass drug dealer I'd have to meet somehow for 40 dollars....I may just go ahead and go to the gas station. So there's that to consider as well.

or look at it this way, person you've been buying off for year $40, bloke at gas station $140, 'cause he has to factor in all sorts of things.
 
or look at it this way, person you've been buying off for year $40, bloke at gas station $140, 'cause he has to factor in all sorts of things.

Then why does this not happen in reality? It is already cheaper to roll your own cigarettes and brew your own beer.
 
Back
Top Bottom