Yup. Legalize it all.

Any law enforcement supporting these retarded laws are indirectly supporting the cartels.

Yeah, umm, tennis shoes.  They are right there with cocaine and child porn, an already illegal items in all advanced countries.



I have no idea why you bring up tennis shoes.  A victim of drugs are the users themselves.  Again, arrogance that says its them?  Victims of drug abuse is exponential and costly emotionally and financially.  One drug abuser in the family will damage the whole family.  Not only is the abuser a victim, parents, spouses, and children especially. I mean really, drug addiction is no joke so watch how you compare.  People will give up everything for a powerful drug addiction.



Alcohol doesn't fare better.  But over a hundred years ago our, and other countries picked out poisons.  Drugs lost.  This is a mind altering substance that will make you do shit that a normal person wouldn't do.  



Having it's possession illegal is a control manner.  The most effective one too.  Doesn't do a 100% job but I'm more than certain it's illicit availability makes it automatically out of reach of many people.  And just avoiding that one or first hit is effective.  Granted I know lots of people whose experiment ranged from one to several hits and stopped, but with drugs for many its a slip from an already slippery slope and there is little to stop it.



Do you think a drug dealer who deals with coke, h, or meth will tell a potential new user,"hey, you should do this" ?  It's another customer for them if they buy his product.  



The g'vmt already regulates all those you've mentioned anyways.  Where have ciggies gone over the last 40 years?  Where have all the cigarette vending machines gone?  Government already has a say how all those items are sold, used, and distributed.



Child porn has a direct victim related to the product.  So the consensus here is cocaine doesn't?  Meth and heroin the same?



Like I said, we have a control and arrogance problem.  But we love to medicate Americans don't we?  Just look at out TV ads.



 

Oh yeah, that's right.  Legalize drugs and all the cartels will, poof, disappear.



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!



You have no clue how it works south of the border.  
 

I don't see much, if any good coming from legalizing it.

But I see much less harm in legalizing it than in how we treat it now.

Yeah, LE is supporting the cartels!  LOL!  NOT the people who actually buy and use the shit. Not the people who hand their money over, no, it's LE enforcing the laws that supports the cartels.

Have you reproduced yet?

So what I'm getting from this thread so far is that 50% of the GD thinks that we're losing the war on drugs and rather than fight, we should give up and legalize everything. 17% aren't currently doing coke because it's illegal but they would like it to be legalized so that they can start doing it. Finally, 33% think it's a terrible fucking idea. This about right?

I'm a 33%er.  Im curious, are only 33% of Arfcomers parents? It's asinine to think that anyone with a child would support legalizing any kind of drug knowing their kids would be more exposed to more drugs. I drink occasionally. Never smoked a cigarette in my life. Tried chewing and didn't like it. As a teen growing up, I drank alchohol. Of my 20 closest friends, I'd say 95% drank, 75% used some form of tobacco, mostly chew. 0% of them did any illegal drugs that I was aware of. I realize that at least 1 out of 20 people probably did drugs but it was looked down upon and no one admitted it or tried to push any of us to do anything. If cocaine was legal for an adult to use, it's telling kids that it's not that harmful. That's pretty fucking stupid to me. None of us were bothered by breaking the law by drinking or using tobacco. We knew it can be harmful but in a year tobacco would be legal and 4 years for drinking. We didn't steal shit, do drugs, or anything else that was illegal across the board for all ages. I guarantee if cocaine was legal, there would have been more than 0% of our group using cocaine.  

Kids have enough problems dealing with drugs today. Getting kids addicted to more shit is just what we need.

Those people are also indirectly supporting it. Too high to fight a war on drugs though. You can always count on LE to actually divert blame when they themselves enforce the laws that keep the cartels in business.

Why are you offering? Are your hips wide enough for the birthing process? I got a big head that's why I'm asking.

As a parent... are you relying on the government to keep your kids from getting addicted to stuff?  Or is that your job?

There's a war on drugs... and the side that's taking them is apparently winning!  And they're all fucked up!

-Bill Hicks

 
Horseshit. We don't need laws that the government does not have the authority to create (at least federally) to supplement bad parenting.


@ the bolded statement.

I wonder how you vote in gun control polls.



Just kidding.



 

As a parent, I'll rely on anything I can to prevent my kids from being addicted to stuff.  I am the front line for prevention. The government might not do much for my cause but I sure as fuck don't need them telling my kids "Hey, when you turn 21 you can start using cocaine"

Legalize yes
Make a brand a tasty beverages with it- absolutely

Where do you draw the line on what you're willing to allow the government to outlaw or regulate for the sake of your kids?

The government hasn't outlawed promiscuous gay sex yet.  Do you expect your children to engage in that when they leave your home?   Or is there something other than a government prohibition against that bad life choice your're trusting to help them make the right choice there?

I think a government so powerful and pervasive that it attempts to outlaw all bad choices for your own good is far more harmful to your kids' future than any drug scourge could ever hope to be.

 
Why does it matter? You already admitted that when you were young you didnt care what the law said in respect to your illicit use of drugs. And how does something not being illegal, get morphed into a glowing personal endorsement from Uncle Sam to your children? Will we get the opposite of the anti-drug commercials? Will Officer Friendly stop by and remind your kids "Children, just remember, in a few years you too can do blow! Its fucking awesome!"

Prohibition simply does far more harm than good. The world our kids live in is drastically more dangerous because of it. It's destabilized neighboring nations, the immigration crisis is a second order effect, one among many. Whenever we use coercion for purposes other than securing rights the unintended consequences always outweigh the benefits, it doesn't matter how benevolent the intent.

I have two children, they've caused me to reconsider a number of political positions, but they've only strengthened my conviction on this one.

 
Yep, the government is practically telling kids to go fuck their brains out. After all its completely legal.

Its legal to be an athesist too! Even a socialist!


Kids are fucking doomed these days.

New PSA?

Jesus Christ.



I should put my tux on.



I haven't tied a bow tie in a while.





 

Unlike guns, booze, and pot, with the really hardcore drugs there is zero potential upside. I'm fine with a ban, just like I'm fine with people not being able to buy biological / chem weapons at walmart. Zero upside with crack or meth.

lol @ the "don't care what other people do in their own home" comments. Shocking naivete regarding the negative impacts on the family & friends of users. Laughable assumption that negative shit will stay "in their homes" and not be a detriment to individuals, the economy, or the security of the nation to have even more brain dead losers than we already do. Same people sit around scratching their heads trying to figure out why Obama and Sanders have so many supporters. Drugs help make people's brains impressionable mush. It massively, and negatively, impacts an individual's judgement. But by all means, if you want air line pilots, cabbies, other drivers, crane operators, bull dozer drivers, and ship captains high as a fucking kite, go ahead and step on board the train to loserville.

The US Constitution as it would read if some of the people in this thread had written it.

Article 1.  The congress shall have the power to outlaw the possession of any substance which, having been ingested, inhaled, imbibed, or injected, may cause an individual (or any number of individuals through cumulative effect) to have a serious detriment to the economy or security of the nation.

All drugs should be legal

I have to admit I am wrong on this issue. The GD has shed some light on the issue and made me look at it from a different perspective. I would like to change my vote to yes. Please legalize cocaine. If gay sex is legal then cocaine should be too. I think I'll write my congressman tomorrow to push for it. I don't want it for me, but for the love of God, legalize it for the good of the youth.

Never said the ban had to be federal. Maybe you should 'imbibe' less.

Pretty broad assumption there.

A couple people in my family, and a few really close friends, have dealt with cocaine, meth, and heroin abuse.   All the law did was make it that much harder for them to go back to a normal life after they cleaned up; the government was not even the slightest bit instrumental in getting them over it.   Inversely, it saddled them with "debts to society," by way of legal fees, jail or prison time, time lost in courts, etc.   My wife works in the treatment field, with both kids and adults, and she supports the notion of complete decriminalization, and regularly condemns government involvement in "drug prevention."

I've had things stolen from me, and had to deal with those people I care about a lot not being themselves while under the influence or while coming down. It's not easy, and the family does suffer, but that's a big part of being a family -- supporting the members of it when things go sour.

ETA: lots of people who manage your portfolio, drive your buses, cabs, planes, and cranes, maintain your information networks, etc. are under the influence of something, and are self-medicating.

Maybe you shouldn't use phrases like" the economy or security of the nation" if you don't mean the national government.

 
If all drugs were legal, there wouldnt even be a market for crack/meth. Nice 100% pharmaceutical grade speed would be the top choice. As to the upside, plenty of people take uppers to improve productivity. Its just that their dealer has a degree hanging on the wall and wears a fancy white coat.


I, and many other people I went to college with, practically survived on caffeine and ephedrine. You could buy a bottle of 50 pills at a truck stop for $10. I hear its Adderall is the new go-to for college kids.

Sure, because what is happening with the population in the various states has no affect on the nation at all.

More importantly, some people seem to be confused and believe that the ONLY response to the drug problem is the current methodology commonly called "the war on drugs". There are many alternatives that include them being illegal, that might be more efficient. Most of the dislike of the WoD revolves around it's ineffectiveness, not necessarily a pro-crack stance. There are exceptions, of course.

If college kids need 'medical grade uppers' to function, they have issues. I have many years of higher ed, in programs requiring all kinds of all-nighters and large production demands, and never needed that shit. I'd suggest that they only make you more productive if you don't consider any long term consequences. A 15 year old taking lots of steroids will get really strong, maybe play a sport well, and maybe die in their mid-40s. Is that increased productivity?

Would the corruption be anywhere nearly as impactful if the corrupting force wasnt MASSIVELY funded by drug money?  Wasnt el chapo one of the on paper wealthiest humans in history?  I see the corruption as the effect of the money not vice versa.

 
I don't know what you schedule was like when in college. Mine was about a 20-22 hour day, 4 days a week, 51 weeks a year. If you were pulling a similar schedule, without having to resort to any assistance you are near god-like.

I aprpreciate hearing from someone with experience. I get what you're saying and a lot of you're points make a lot of sense. My only argument, and more of a question to you, don't you think decriminalization would lead to more people becoming addicted? I don't disagree with you that legalizing it would make it easier for the people already addicted. But my opinion is legalizing drugs would result in a net loss.

I'll use myself as an analogy. I have no interest in using cocaine. If it was legalized tomorrow, I wouldn't even try it. For the same reason I don't smoke, it just has no appeal to me. On the other hand, I love speed(think cars, not drugs) I drive the speed limit or up to 5 over usually. If speed limits were lifted tomorrow, I would probably be driving 100mph. I'm not saying I want speed limits lifted but I would take advantage of they were. The law is what prevents me from speeding I think drug laws are keeping some people from using. It's my opinion, that as soon as drugs became legal, it would add a lot of users to the system instantly.

 
To say that I have felt the negative consequences of addiction, would be putting it lightly. Both parents killed themselves with their addiction. Brother has nearly done so a couple times. Sister just got done doing a federal stint over hers. And I can say without any hesitation that the vast majority of people that would use hard drugs, already do so. They are broken on the inside and what the law says about their drug of choice is of very little concern. I would put it at roughly, or even slightly lower, to the amount of people that get hurt and end up shooting H once the pills stop. I say slightly lower, because there would be less of a catalyst to introduce folks to the drug for them to even begin to go down that road.


I have seen shit loads of people, personally, destroy their lives due to addiction. NOT A SINGLE ONE benefited from it being illegal. The stark difference between the addicts of legal substances vs illegal ones is just how quick they spiral downward. You know what will get an addict to get going on a death spiral of a binge? Throw them in jail, make them a felon, make them owe thousands to the state, ruin their job chances and generally treat them like a second class citizen. At that point, what else is there to do but getting fucking wasted and try to forget about it.

Using Portugal as our model, we would probably see an upswing in people experimenting, then things would settle to levels lower than they were before.  If we address treatment for addicts as a cultural issue, and not a criminal one, we can reduce the number of people occupying cells that probably shouldn't be there, and fast-track the recovery process.  This eliminates incredibly expensive and lengthy legal processes, and gets people into the workforce again and back to normal lives faster. There are lots of places that excel in doing this, and going to them brings my household money.  The private side of the recovery industry has developed incredibly effective strategies and methodologies that bring recidivism  rates into the single digits for more than a few demographics.  

The important thing to remember here is, we have a very large, and very complex criminal element involved in the procurement, distribution, and sale of these banned substances.  Legalizing would be a very important step in reducing their control.  You don't need to go to a shady guy in the projects to buy your drug of choice, instead you can hit up a corner store where the risk of being shot, abducted, killed, robbed, or hustled is substantially lower. Legalizing removes the criminal element, which brings these operations into the daylight.  



Speed limits don't stop people from speeding now.   For example, there's several hundred miles of I-15 here that have an 80mph speed limit, where exceeding it is punishable by law, yet you will need to do at least 95mph to keep with the flow of traffic.  Despite that, very few people are involved in accidents as a result of the increased speeds, even though they're usually shitty Utah drivers It's also very likely that those people are not going to do 100mph through their suburbs.  While an unpopular opinion in GD, most people are reasonably skilled at understanding when something is "safe and prudent,: which means they are not likely to go 100mph through their neighborhood.  Even now drinking alcohol is legal, yet a small percentage of the population imbibes during times where other responsibilities are present.   Other drugs would not be any different.

What's your alternative?  Are you saying that legalization would make those addicted stop using?  Would they magically then decide to stop?

OR, are you saying that if drugs where legal and no stigma or penalties  were attached to drug abuse, then an addict will have no record and they can work and have self esteem which will lead them to get clean. Everyone drug addicted  started with a clean slate and drug free at one time or another.... and yet, somewhere along the way they made a decision to use.... but are you saying that once they use, if they incur no penalties they will clean up?

OR, are you saying you are OK with an addict holding a job where he or she may be a danger to others?

What are you advocating?  Just leave them be?

Yes, it gave them a criminal record. They partook of some arbitrarily illicit substance, got caught with some, and became wrapped up in the legal system, miring them for YEARS in each case.   Although you clearly do not ever experience lapses in judgement, lots of people do, and is a normal part of being human.  Laws already exist to punish people for crimes against other people; punishing people for doing things they inflict  on themselves is a testament to the overbearing nature of our current government.



The government should do NOTHING. That's the crux of the argument; everything the government does is counter-productive in enabling people to return to society as productive citizens.  Insttead, it makes mandates about where the person can live, where they can be at what time, inflict random UA's -- which almost entirely eliminates the possibility of having a decent job if you need to leave at 2:45 on a Tuesday for 2 hours -- limits their rights to vote, to arm themselves, and generally makes their lives more difficult and expensive.



The problem is the laws around drugs exist for no other reason than to create criminals and perpetuate a systemic abuse of governmental power.  All you are deterring is people's ability to make choices for themselves. Laws already exist to deter people from committing crimes against other people and people's property; those don't need auxiliary laws to make them effective if the perpetrator of such a crime just so happens to be under the influence of xyz.




I already answered what you do with people who commit crimes against other people -- use the laws that already exist. They don't need extensions for perpetrators under the influence of drugs.  Carjacking someone stone-cold sober is entirely identical to carjacking someone when high.   I do not advocate, nor have I alluded to at any point in this conversation, that people who commit crimes while under the influence should "get out of jail free."

It's becoming apparent that you've never actually dealt with this first hand, and seen what it takes and what it does.  In fact, it would appear you have absolutely no understanding of this issue, and subsequently I believe it's probably in your best interest to stop voicing an opinion on it until you garner some knowledge or experience
about it.

I'm not "bitching" about the penalties that a drug user might incur any more than I bitch about a sober person would, assuming that those penalties are levied against an individual who's actually committed a crime against another person.  There's a vast difference between enabling, and helping. One turns a blind eye to someone's behavior, another addresses it; as with any familial intervention, the focus is and always should be prompting a change behavior, not a communal dismissal of the problem. The entire treatment field is structured around equipping families with techniques to help their addicted family members recover, in addition to providing strategies to the abuser.  

I'm all for loosening criminal charges related, but only if it were a treated as a medical/mental health issue dealt with with treatment. I'm not for the opening up of recreational cocaine stores or putting it on the shelves of your local corner grocery store.

I don't see the value of spending money on drug cops, spending money on housing users in prison, spending money on their hospital stays, etc only to release them so they can simply repeat the cycle. Asinine.

 
Addiction is a mental health problem and needs to be treated as such. Crimes against another person should result in criminal penalties. Its really that simple.


Not too mention its really pretty damn hypocritical in many ways. For example, the VA basically killed my dad. They botched his back surgeries, gave him tons of pain killers. Every time he would OD, they would just up his dosage. Made no effort to address the underlying problems. Just kept piling opiates on him until one day, he just didn't wake up. All perfectly legal and above board. Yet we will throw another person in jail for having those same pills.

Cocaine is already "legal".  Well, more legal than pot.  Dr's can prescribe and use it in special cases, not so with pot.

But, yes, pretty much all illicit drugs should be "decriminalized".

Drugs aren't the problem, drug related crime is.

Oh but I have. I watched several people in my extended family go down the tubes due to drug use and being  addicts... and the havoc they caused on the way was terrible to their families and children.

The ones that eventually got clean did so because they hit rock bottom and didn't want to spend the rest of their days  in jail or dead.... near death experiences is what reached them.

No amount of coddling , understanding, love, compassion, etc. EVER reached them and caused them to get clean.

My dad went way out on a limb and vouched for one of these people, got him a good job, purchased him a used car,  gave him some money etc......... and he lasted 3 days on the job, wrecked the car and disappeared for a long while.

Addicts gonna addict. The only people that seem to be seriously hindered by these laws are gainfully employed folks that wanna party.

Try to find the part of the Constitution that empowers the government to declare an intoxicant illegal. Before you do that, though, look up the 9th Amendment.

According to Anslinger, pot will allow black jazz musicians to seduce young white girls. We can't have that!

Everybody who wants coke can get it, legal or not. Your argument fails the sniff test.

Tried it once many years ago. Nothing like the propaganda makes it out to be.

I'd categorize it as a happy drug. You feel good, relaxed, and VERY talkative.
Knowing the cost, both financialy and legaly, it wasn't something that I had interest in doing again.

The problem lies within the low lifes in society who have no respect for others,. Think crack heads, meth, etc. They dont care about you. They are the problem, not weak ass drugs like cocaine.
... What I mean to say, is that it depends on the person. Some people are abusers with no concience, self control or respect. Allow nature to take its course.

There is a whole lot "do it for the chil'runz" in this thread.

As a 44 year old creepy ass cracker who has not married and has no kids, I have zero fucking sympathy for whatever your kids may or may not get addicted to...with or without government intervention.

Actually, I'd prefer zero government education on the matter.  Maybe it would free up some time for getting back to the three R's.

And I am saying all the above as a former 11 year old who saw the remnants of his 20 year old brother's body hooked up to all these machines because he was drunk and or high when he tried crossing the street and got dragged underneath a car for a few hundred feet.

Let that visual sink in to your mind for a minute and imagine just how indeliable that particular memory would be:  an innocent 11 year old seeing this bloodied and bruised pulp that was his older brother with all these wires and tubes and the click clacks and the beep beeps of the machines keeping him alive.

It probably seems odd to you then that I haven't been stuck in this knee jerk of a reaction of "BAN EVERYTHING!"  for the past 33 years.

People are going to do whatever to their bodies regardless of the .gov .  Or in spite of the .gov .

All the .gov does is artificially increase risks and reduce supply, and we all know from Econ 101 what happens  to prices when you reduce the supply of something.

And with prices so high, all that does is act as a draw or lure for the ne'er-do-wells to have turf wars and prop up organized crime.

Yeah, no, coke is evil, if it's even easier to get/afford, even more people will die. Record numbers in the first month.

Absolutely, and not because of the WoD.  

Let people put into their own bodies, whatever they want.  If they OD, oh well.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

I don't have an issue with Marijuana. Liqour etc and they just pretty much kill ambition.....but

abuse of coke and smack kills. Kills the mind, the body, the spirit and much of the family that has to deal with
these type of junkies.


and I'll ask again to all the "libertarian" pro drug folks..

we have and will always have a form of welfare state as part of a Representative Republican government.
we take care of those who cant help themselves as both a free society and a moral society.

BUT the current level of abuse of this system is rampant...with little optimism of change...so
how. once legalizing drugs that do debilitate. do you not support the addiction and eventual death
of what is now a useless member of society.?

pole fail.

No "IDGAF" option.