OK -- Debate on Drugs

So I've read probably 100 "legalize marijuana" essays in my time as a Freshmen Composition teacher and I've made up my own mind about it -- which is sort of reinforced since my dad got diagnosed with cancer. But I'm curious about other people and how they feel about it. I sometimes find myself stuck in these academic bubbles of thought that have no realtionship to the real world and lose touch -- and I've got a student doing a legalize marijuana paper right now. Yesterday I found myself saying something to him about his paper that sounded like a script (I've read so many) and I was a little upset with myself. Are my beliefs so completely easy to reduce into a soundbite? Have I just simply thought about this too much? Did my STUDENT think it sounded like a script? Ack!

So let's debate it, if you want to. I tend toward thinking that coke and herion and such should NOT be legalized. But I also think that marijuana is pretty harmless when compared with liquor and would be a great source of tax revenue for local governments. And from my experience, it's true that A LOT Of people smoke it and are going to smoke it regardless of its legality. I don't understand the reasoning behind throwing pot users in jail, or denying say, a cancer patient, the ability to use it to help with nausea because his/her employer is going to test for it later, etc. It just seems so, well, harmless to me -- much less harmless than liquor.

Thoughts?

Zana

In short, I believe all drugs should be legal and highly regulated similar to alcohol.

Elaboration:

Let's go over what is commonly known to be true about drugs:

- they can be bad for you and your physical/mental health
- they can be addictive
- they can lead to criminal behavior

So, if drugs are as described above, how can I suggest that we legalize (and regulate) even the most extreme drugs?

Well, I'm a firm believer in supply/demand. I also do not believe that our government will ever make any headway in the war on drugs. I also don't think it is the role of the government to tell you what you can and cannot ingest or do to your own body. That's my opinion, mind you.

If the governments war on drugs is a no-win war, could it be that our billions of dollars could be spent on prevention and awareness campaigns that might actually curb usage?

If drugs were legal and regulated, the government would now have true control over the substances, something that is not currently attainable. As prohibition proved, when you make a popular past time illegal (i.e. consumption of alcohol), you only force it underground, you do not stop it.

With regulation, the government could control who it is sold to, where it is sold, and the quality of what is sold. The government could also levy a nice, hefty tax on the products. The store owner who would lose his license for selling to a minor is more likely not to do so, than a street corner drug dealer, as he's already breaking the law.

Making all drugs legal and strongly regulated will also help our economy, I believe. In 2000, we spent nearly $40 billion on the drug war, and failed. Somewhere I read it would cost us $85 billion to rebuild every school in this country.

Here's a great link to the effectiveness on the drug war.

Also, think about all of the additional monies that could fund rehab, prevention, and awareness campaigns solely from the taxes generated by this new, $400 billion/year industry (worldwide).

We should legalize it, because it makes sense. If you're on the opposite side of the fence of this.. put aside your personal fear/disdain for drugs and look at the overall effect this war has on our country. You'll see that it makes more sense, financially and socially, to legalize and regulate.

Sorry my thread isn't more eloquently posted, but I'm no writer!

and let's not forget.. the farmers!

yes, medicinal use is extremely important and is a huge reason to legalize marijuana all it's own.

BUT!

if marijuana were legalized, farmers would have two new crops to grow: Hemp & Marijuana. This alone would have amazing results and a huge ripple effect.

-farms being saved from government/big company buy-outs

-more profitable farming with a faster turn-around of crops

-more jobs to process the materials

-no longer a need to import hemp cloth products

-the ability to export hemp cloth products

-strengthens the economy

-feasability to creating a hemp based fuel for wide use

-feasable hemp-based paper products

-reduction in tree harvesting

-reduction in forest reduction


this is, i'm sure, not a complete list.. and i have a million things i could say on this subject, but this is all for now.

..i shall return... oh yes.. i shall

Ill get on board with legalizing them all.
I wont get on board with them being available at the corner store or pharmacy.
We *are* talking about "recreational" drugs, so lets make them TRULY recreational substances only available at theme parks of a sort.

I would like to see a place where you go, sign the releases, pay the fee, get your wristband, go in and do all the crazy drugs you could EVER have wanted to do and fry your brain if you choose!
If you OD while you are there, you get shuffled out the back end to a crematorium and your ashes sent to your loved ones listed on your release papers.

In lieu of the theme park idea, Im a very big fan of tracking the people that do use these newly legal and regulated drugs.
Do you want them working for you? Teaching your kids? Driving their school bus? Flying your airplane?
In fact I would be in favor of compylsory unrinalysis right now!

I once asked someone in the Human Resources department of a large company that required a pre employment drug screening if employees were required to submit to random urinalysis? Her reply staggered me!
"If we tested all 2500+ employees TODAY, just for marijuana, we would easily lose 300-400 people."
I thanked her for her time and left the new employee orientation.

So yeah! Legalize the HELL out of drugs, just make it so that the people that willingly do the friggin things arent around the rest of us!

that's what a 'private use only' rule is for.

i agree that they should not be legal to use anywhere at anytime. they should be used in private (whether that be a home or a designated indoors facility, i.e.: coffeeshop).


..although that park idea IS pretty amusing, heheh

I am all for legalizing marijuana, but thats about it. And even then it should have an 18 year old age requirement. I smoke pot, and have throughout my life. It IS addictive, even if just mentally so, (though it sure felt like a physical addiction to me). I presently only do a little here and there, and never search it out, but when I went from being a heavy pot smoker to an occasional one, it was damn tough.

Also, pot can be very bad on your drive and ambition and active lifestyle. Not all those commercials are false.

As to more mind altering drugs, I would have to say no to legalization. Sure, the government shouldn't be able to tell us what to do with our own bodies. Unfortunately, some of these drugs can alter rational thought in such a way that people do incredibly stupid or harmful things, not just to themselves, but to others. I've done many types of drugs, at least the old-timer ones, such as acid (in it's many forms), coke, pure THC, peyote, crank, pcp (angel dust), mescaline, shrooms, about 30 kinds of speed, opium, and many types of tranquilzers and perscription drugs (for recreational purposes). I know for a fact that most of them DO cloud your judgement. And that can, and sometimes does, lead to so dangerous or harmful situations to others, not just the person doing the drug.

I'd be all for letting anyone do anything they wanted as long as they were watched or guarded or in a full proof safe place. But that will never be the case...

I don't think you'd find a soul on earth who is for legalizing drugs that would say you should be able to use them anywhere anytime. I mean, we can't *drink* on the job but that's legal. We shouldn't be able to smoke pot on the job either. However, at the same time, regardless of what the propogandists want us to think -- a teacher smoking the odd joint on the weekend doesn't bother me in the least, good on her/him. It's no worse than drinking wine on the weekends. Do you expect that teachers have such a life that they don't ever have the odd glass of wine? Ha!

I'd much rather have a pot-smoking teacher teaching my kids than an alcoholic .

But that's just me .

Zana

David,

Sorry to call you out like this, but I think you're being a bit hypocritical. It's OK for you to do them illegally, but not allow others to do them legally? I understand that you may have decided that they were not for you, as alot of people do.

I know of at least 2 dozen of my friends who do drugs. I say 'do' for anyone who does them.. I ignore frequency. Most of my friends partake in pot, E, shrooms, speed, K, acid... One of my friends did have a bad drug habit and OD'd last year. It was very sad and difficult for alot of us to deal with. Interestingly, he also had a very bad drinking problem, so in his case, it was that he was additcted to substances.

Burying our heads in the sand, as we've done for decades, will not stop people from using. It will not stop traffickers from sending more drugs into this country.

We can choose the path that continues to drain out bank account (where that money could be going to education), cost lives, fill out jails.... Or we could choose the path that brings a huge, existing, thriving market into the fold. Tax it. Take control of this industry from the hands of dealers/pushers and into the hands of corporate leaders (i know, i know.. which one is worse, huh?) and control what is sold.

Ive also done my fair share of drugs... lots of them. I quit because I didn't like the hangovers (btw: i dont drink/smoke either), don't like spending my money on it...

Still, I think legalization is the *only* way we'll ever truly control this issue.

I'd be for legalizing marijuana for private use only. Other drugs are just too dangerous, even if used in private. I've never heard of anyone lighting themselves on fire after a few beers.

Darwin, which ones? I mean, we all know pcp and heroin... but, E, acid, shrooms? I've never heard of anyone lighting themself on fire while on E.

The worst thing I know of from those is an old acquaintance who took a dump in his pants at a club while on E. Evidentally, it felt good. (besides my friend who OD'd, I should say)

Yes, you hear of the tragic stories, but for every tragedy, there are probably hundreds upon hundreds of seemingly uneventful (non-tragic) trips taken.

So, what I'd really like to hear are some alternatives from those of you who don't favor legalization. Are you OK spending all this money on something we can't stop? You OK cutting out music programs, sports programs, new books, and various school supplies so we can continue to fund this war?

Lighting oneself on fire is an example. Shrooms, though, are often poisonous when picked by the amatures that oft pick them. E can be fatal the first time you take it. It takes a fark of a lot of marijuana to OD.

We shouldn't forget that there are more than domestic casualties in our "war on drugs" -- South America is a test lab for the next step in that war, where we're giving military aid in internal conflicts to the side that's willing to let us spray the countryside with Roundup, killing not just the drug crops of local farmers, having an unknown impact on the environment, and spreading the conflict throughout the region as both the Roundup and the drug farmers cross borders.

The easiest and most practical way to deflate the drug problem would be to legalize but regulate all recreational substances. This would remove the artificially high price drugs generally have due to their illegality and would expose them to the free market, driving prices down further and removing funding for the violent groups who depend on drugs. There is evidence that exposure to certain drugs can screw with an adolescent's brain, so certainly there should be a minimum age. There should also be quality tests, etc., just like you'd have with any other FDA-approved drug. I look forward to seeing the nutritional content of pot as expressed by the label of a Betty Crocker Special Brownies mix.

Whether allowing farmers to grow hemp will be a boom for agriculture is debatable, I think. The same forces that are forcing family farms out of business will force family hemp farms out of business, as well. The only way we'll grow hemp here, I think, is if you can feed it to cattle.

Phineas,

actually.. the reason these farms are being bought out is because they can't make enough money on what they can farm.
..if they could add hemp as a crop it would boulster their worth and their income.. allowing them to keep their farms.

Darwin, can you elaborate on the first time E dosage deaths? I've heard of people dying from extreme saturation (largely due to the myth that you must consume water while on E). Is this what you're referring to? I've not heard of anyone dying from E, itsself though.

"Private Use Only"
Ok so this must be purchased legally correct?
And home grown is STILL illegal correct?

GOOD!
Now tag the ass that bought it and when his number pops up on the system, fire him, call his car note and house note due as of the first of the next month.
That is if he even HAS either.

Now when he is looking for someplace to live have his number pop on all the apartments that someone would actually want to live in and discriminate against his stupid pot smoking ass.

SO! Now he is living with the other unemployed or waffle house working potheads on the waffle house working pothead side of town. His wife comes to her senses and divorces him and takes the kids and goes BACK to Non-Drug society.

Sure! Legalize the hell out of pot! Just make sure that we keep the potheads WITH the potheads and AWAY from the rest of the non-drug society.

Oh my God! Did I just use some contorted bullshit form of hate speech against illegal drug users?
Will I be banned?
*cringe*
Fucking Pot Heads make me sick.

Complete and total side note here:
A couple of years ago my wife, (then 16 yr old) daughter and me were out at a mexican resturaunt. The margaritas at the table next to us looked so good I ordered one for me and the wife.
The look on my daughters face was something of near horror!
She then admits to haveing half of her friends parents being pot smokers and having seen 80% of them DRUNK at one time or another and yet had *NEVER* seen her mother or me with a single drink until that moment.
It then dawned on me that she was right... we hadnt had a single drink in 16 years and yet all of her friends parents were partiers of some sort.
Sad commentary on parents if you ask me.
Friggin pukestains for parents... some future of this country huh?

There's absolutely no rational reason for marijuana to be illegal. Aspirin has more harmful side effects than pot does. The only reason it's illegal is that people tend to believe the propoganda and it's a cheap and easy way for politicians to score points with the law and order crowd.

When people think if legal substances like alchohol we tend to see the people who become adicts and ruin their lives as the minority... the exception rather than the rule.

When it comes to illigal drugs like pot, coke, E, etc it's the opposite... through endless propoganda we've come to see people who use these drugs safely, intelligently, and without screwing their lives up as the exception. This is, of course, complete bullshit. The vast majority of users of illegal drugs use responsibly.

Chip,

Where are you getting your evidence from? I know alot of drinkers, and can't really say any of them are better off for drinking, and many of them are alchoholics, some recovering, some slowly killing themselves. Sure, a lot of folks are responsible drinkers, but a lot of folks aren't. The same with illegal drugs, other than pot. I've seen people lose jobs, houses, cars and families from coke habits. I've seen people drop off the face of the earth from heroin use. I've seen people go downhill time and time again..and yet I've never seen anyone's life improved by using these drugs. Sure..maybe a fun night at a club, or a laughing jag, or some good sex...but overall, they suffer for it in the long run..so the scales tip downward slowly (sometimes quickly) but surely.

Would you hand your son or daughter these drugs on her 18th birthday and smile and tell him/her to have fun? Would you tell your son/daughter that they need to drink more alchohol? Would you lay out some lines for your grown children and giggle while they snorted them? Maybe I'm just an old party-pooper, but I've been around many a block and, while I think pot is relatively harmless, though not entirely so, and have no problem with it being legalized, I think most other illegal drugs should remain illegal...

Here son..have some crack...it's legal!

i knew this would happen.. hehehe.. here we go, all in good natured debate.




actually, no. allow for a small amount to be grown at home.




if it's legal, then why would this be an option?




actually, there would probably be communities where this happens.. such as Berkeley, CA? New Hope, PA? Amsterdam, NL? ..hmm, all of these places have a tradition of being tolerant, peaceful, and welcoming to strangers.
..sounds pretty cool to me.
besides, this way the people who are closed-minded and trigger-happy would effectively be kept with the rest of their own as well.
..again, sounds good to me.




banned? don't think so. while it may be mean, it's not hate speech, per se. it's your opinion and that's what America is about.. freedom. freedom of expression, freedom of speech, freedom of choice.. oh wait, no.. not really choice.. that's what this is all about.
..and from what you've said, you fought for these rights.
thank you.




and alcohol kills how many people a year? 150,000 (PLUS 50% of all highway deaths and 65% of all murders!!!)

and marijuana kills how many people a year? 0


yup.. looks like pot is horrible.

how about another margarita?

I'm going to ignore Christopher's assertion that all pot users should be isolated to their own island because he generally thinks anyone unlike him oughtta be on their own island . . . (sorry Chris, but you do, admit it ).

I have to clarify that I think some substances should remain under tight control -- coke, heroin, anything that causes a serious addiction within a first try or two. I don't think we should legalize ALL drugs for personal use, mainly just marijuana. I agree that the vast majority of pot smokers do so responsibly. We hear a lot of horror stories. We rarely hear the story about the guy who works hard 8 or 9 hours a day and comes home to smoke one joint and then gets up and goes back to work the next day and the next.

Not all pot smokers smoke around their kids, not all pot smokers are automatically crazed drugged lunatics. I wonder what's different about the cultural ideas in say, Vancouver, where pot is legal for private use and the Netherlands, where it is also legal for private use.

I've never heard a single piece of news that the pot smokers in those two places have caused huge stress on the resources there OR that they are doing much of anything but boosting their respective economies a little.

Anyone ever lived in Vancouver or Amsterdam want to tell us what it's like?

Zana

David,

I have to disagree with your thoughts there. First, our government cannot control individuals actions, even if they might be dangerous to others. I've never bought into that arguments (which I've heard many times) as there are plenty of things that hold the *potential* to be harmful to bystanders, yet we would never consider banning. What could *potentially* be dangerous to others... driving your car, hunting, golfing, baseball... I mean think about the list of items where there is *potential* to do harm to others. It's just silly, and a waste of resources.

Yes, drugs cloud your mind, as does alcohol.... yet, we still let people drink. Thankfully through good regulation, awareness campaigns, and stiffer penalties, drunk driving has been on the decline for decades. A good example where regulation works.

David, as for your question regarding the benefit of drugs: the drugs themselves may hold benefits, but you're missing my point, and also where the *true* benefit is: regulation.

Imagine if we didn't have to spend $40billion a year ($60billion if you include what states spend) on fighting this war. Imagine if you were able to pull in at least $40billion from taxing the products, each year. Right there we've saved $80billion... $80 billion that could help fund better schools and more prevention/awareness campaigns.

Dig a little deeper and we save even more money. Most people who are in jail/prison are in for drug-related crimes. If there were no more dealers, we'd save money in court costs and lawyer fees. We could focus our peace officers on other forms of crimes that affect our communities.

By keeping drugs illegal, you fuel the underground network of dealers/pushers/suppliers... even if you don't buy anything.

Christopher: I'll only agree with your 'tracking' if you agree to register your guns! Fair is fair, right?

I want my own island! I want my own island!

Cris, buy me an island and I promise to rid the good ole US of A of at least a dozen aging hippies! We'll all go live quietly and communally in the tropical paradise of your choice.

Maybe something with nice white sand beaches?

B

My sister is a really big hemp nut (mainly because our grandfather singlehandedly killed off domestic hemp production back in the thirties, but that's another story) and you are absolutely right. There is nothing, from paper to plastics, clothing and biofuels that can't be made from hemp, better and cheaper than from other vegetable fibers, but, in general, the hemp that you use for these things is a non-psychotropic cousin to cannabis sattiva, and we all ought to work to get it separated from marijuana in the minds of politicians.

David, on the surface it's hard to argue with your point of view here, but if you dig a little deeper you'll find that drugs really aren't the issue at all. Juro's post was excellent and my thoughts on this are very close to his. Fighting the war on drugs does far more harm to this society than then drugs themselves. This is about personal responsibility versus risk to society. Drugs are a risky behavior, no doubt, but those risks are overstated. Life is full of risky behaviors. Do you rock climb? Ride motorcycles? skydive? eat fried foods daily? let yourself carry a few extra pounds? play football? If we looked at risk in general the way we look at risks associated with drug use then a lot of things would be illegal. We'd be fighting the war on cars... the war on bathtubs... the war on aspirin.

In a purely statistical sense the risks from drugs being legal would likely be less than the risks they pose being illegal, and in general the risks they pose both to the user and to society at large are no worse than alchohol, smoking, or working in a coal mine. Drug use carries a moral stigma that's been a convenient platform for politicians and as a result we don't view it through a purely rational statistical lens. It's time we stopped sending college educated productive members of society off to federal prison for years simply because they're willing to take more risks than other people are comfortable with. Personally I'll never free climb a mountain or jump from an airplane. You won't catch me running the bulls. But you might find me wandering through the woods on a hit of LSD. To each their own.

One thing is for certain. No matter what we do vices are here to stay. The war on drugs has done nothing to slow their use. It fuels gangs, organized crime, murder, robbery, and everything else that prohibitions cause. It ruins the lives of people who would otherwise be holding jobs and contributing to our culture and economy. The drugs are what they are, and wether you like them or not is irrelevant. They aren't going away. The war on drugs is a mistake. It causes far more harm than it prevents.

For a really well reasoned and presented book on the subject you should check out Jacob Sullum's Saying Yes: In Defense of Drug Use

Certain hormones in the frontal lobe react in a very dangerous way with certain people, and this reaction of enzymes cannot be detected with any tests that I know of. What E does, basically is bypass the frontal lobe, which involves temporarily depleting the synapsis of the enzymes it takes to make them "go," but in order to do that, you need to cut a few things. The ingrediant of E that gets to the synapses it needs to cut may sometimes cause a kind of allergic reaction in the brain.

Or at least that's what I heard