This is a realistic point of view?  That line of thinking leads to everything eventually becoming legal.  If you legalize drugs then those gangsters don't just shurg their shoulders and go get government jobs.  They move on to other illegal items to make a profit.  What happens when instead of drugs it becomes fetish properties like child porn or snuff tapes that's causing violent crime?  Do you legalize that too?  As long as there are illegal items that are hard to come by, there will be money in them.



Cruel and unusual punishment for their "disability" to control themselves.

When I was a kid my parents rented a house to a family that had lost everything in a fire while they got on their feet again.  Soon the mom and dad both started using heroin and speed, and eventually started spending more than they could afford on both to keep up with their habits.  So, they stopped paying bills and buying groceries because they didn't need food, but that didn't help their two kids!  And those sorry sacks of human genetic material attempted to break into my family's house to steal what little we had to pawn for drugs.  They were finally caught and they had pawned several thousand dollars worth of stolen merchandise at cut rates to fuel their drug habit, while their children lived in squalor and didn't even bathe.  How's that for a victimless crime.

My best friend's father is a recovering crack addict, and he talks about how nothing was more important than scoring a rock to smoke.  Stealing from his family was acceptable.  Mugging old people was acceptable.  And when he was at rock bottom, performing oral sex was acceptable.  I'm sorry, but you want to compare alcohol to crack, then find me some guy who's blown a liquor store owner for a bottle of hooch.  Do you think prices for drugs would go down because the government takes over?  How much are you tobacco addicts paying for a pack these days after the state get's their pound of flesh?

What's funny is when you see the desperate attempts of a crackhead to score a rock and realize it's pretty much the same agony as some "free living Marlboro man" type who can't find a cigarette.

I've done drugs.  I've drank to excess.  I have a basis to compare the two, and I'm sorry, but personally drinking never had the draw that addictive drugs did.

I dare any of you folks out there who think there's no difference between substances to take the Pepsi challenge.  Go out and compare the effects of drinking one beer to doing just a tiny bit of heroin, and I guarantee you they're not the same.  Sure, both can ruin lives, but I've seen heroin and cocaine do it quicker than most of the stuff that comes in a bottle ever did, and I've spent enough time in AA and NA meetings to know the difference.  And that's why I don't do anything anymore.

God Bless Texas

Have you hung out with the average 11th grader recently?  I have, and quite frankly that statement that "kids are too smart for that" is the most ignorant thing I've heard all week.  They think they're too smart for that, which is part of the problem to begin with.

Scary truth?  It has been my experience that most pro-drug users have never seen the scary truth about drug use, nor would they want to.

God Bless Texas

I do NOT use "drugs" (beer is not a drug, right?) but think that the so called War on Drugs is hurting this country far greater than the pitiful amount it helps.

I’m an advocate of legalizing some drugs and keeping others off the street as some here have so eloquently voiced.  Why?  I work in a prison system and meet people every day whose only crime was possession of a little weed and being in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Yes, I did read the case jackets and this was brought out at trial.  However with mandatory sentencing in effect they do the time anyway.  It cost a lot of money to put and keep them here and generally makes them very bitter and angry.  Do you blame them?  Then are these laws contributing to future offenders because they have criminal records, receive minimal to no counseling and dumped back on the streets all pissed off?

Of course we are!  Keeping personal drug use illegal is detrimental to our society.  Unless they have a flash suppressor or bayonet lug, THEN they should be illegal. [;)]

Just $0.02 from one in the trenches.

I'm afraid I had to throw in the big NO on this one. on the one hand, leagalizing these subtances would give the government something else to tax and at the pace "responsable" adults would be buying, the national debt could be erased in no time.
On the other hand,I have personnaly seen some of my "responsable, casual user" friends and relatives destroy and even end their own life and the lives of others.
I'm not saying that it would be any different than booze. "responsable" people abuse that too.
but why give "responsable" people another excuse to to damage their life and the lifes of their friends and loved ones.
just because its taxed and regulated, dont make it right.

[:)>]

Maybe Drugs are Darwin in action?

If we legalize drugs, it will be so much easier for the useless people of society to OD themselves.

Let's horstrade. Us conservatives agree to legalize (pot only) if liberals agree to let AW bill sunset without trying messing with it!

Anyone...

Sure it will, We will tell addicts that drugs are bad for them, then they will stop.  You obviously have no idea what the definition of addiction is.  Drug addicts already know what they are doing is harmful, knowledge is irrelevant.

But lets be honest BOG, what you really want is to smoke your pot and not feel guilty about it....RIGHT????

Sgtar15

Exactly, but also we would need more laws to enforce such things as driving under the influence of marijuana and things like that. Drugs are just not a good thing. They serve no purpose other than to provide an addiction to the weak.

Exactly. Sorry for using all of your points Sgtar15, but they just reflect my feelings on the subject.

It's called Dope for a reason!

What about the children of these people who instantly become irresponsible parents?

There are legitimate medical uses for most if not all drugs.  If I want to take the time to learn how to use them properly, why shouldn’t I be allowed to buy them for my personnel medical use – there no 100% guarantee that medical assistance will be available everywhere.

True people do abuse drugs but that’s part of human nature.  Kind of funny though, the DARE program statistically has been proven to promote drug use among kinds – who would have though.
- Sulaco

in my opinion, drugs are bad, they suck, people that use them are weak and need a crutch and then expect everyone else to pay for their mess.  

there is no such thing as victimless drug use, let me repeat - THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS VICTIMLESS DRUG USE!

i have posted on this subject before and got the usual b.s. replies about 'natural selection', 'thinning the herd'.  i felt that type of response may be true for adults, but the family members that i was forced to deal with were introduced to drugs at a young age - middle school/high school and by adulthood(late teens/early 20's) they were hooked hard and would try any drug they found.  
They would steal and lie to support their habit.  Since their drug-using friends also traded everything they owned for drugs they could not steal from them, so they would steal from family, friends, neighbors - anyone was fair game.  it was all about getting more drugs.
 
One burned out her brain at 16 when a friend put something in her drink, resulting in a medicated vegetable and family burden for the last 30 years and still going, one dead from o.d., and another a bullet to the head because he just couldn't continue fighting his additiction.  Naturally, the rest of society has to deal with the wife/girlfriend and kids that are left behind.  Recently, a family friend received a call that her 17 year old son, spending the night with a friend, was found dead of an overdose of oxycontin.  This WORKING single mother (divorced, deadbeat dad)of two did not have a very merry Christmas.  These examples began in middle/high school, the parents could not monitor every minute of the child's day.

my thoughts were that if you were an ADULT and made that choice, stayed home when you were using, didn't ask me to support you when you had no job or support your children and your  girlfriend or wife - FINE.  

What about the kids of the drug using parents, the peer pressure at school, the 'free' drugs that they are given to get them hooked and turn them into profit centers for pushers?  Like cigarettes and alcohol if they are available, the kids will find them.

the so-called drug war is a joke and will only be changed when citizens tire of watching their children die and demand change.  we let them harvest the Afgan crop so that it can be turned into profit to kill our children, kill our soldiers and finance terrorism to kill innocent civilians.  where was the outcry from washington - they were probably busy counting their campaign contributions, looking the other way and making drug enforcement at the pusher/distributor level impotent while busting caps on old hippies puffin a single reefer.

just my $.02, but i could be wrong.

a big NO from me.

first, there's no such thing as responsible drug use.  yeah, yeah, i know you users are whining that you aren't addicted, and maybe you're not.  but how responsible can you be when you're ingesting crap that screws with your body's natural mechanisms?  how can you be responsible when you're purposefully and knowingly letting [b]toxins[/b] enter into your body?  how is it responsible to avoid your problmes and create false euphoria's that don't even come close to real life?  you're deluding yourselves.  that ain't responsible; that's stupid.

second, legalizing drugs because alcohol and tobacco are legal is absolutely the most ridiculous argument i've heard.  when you want to argue for or against something, you're supposed to argue using the [b]merits[/b] or [b]disadvantages[/b] of said something, not compare it to the price of tea in china.  

third, actually, i take back what i said above.  the most ridiculous argument is that people are going to do it anyway, so let's remove all of the legal conseuquences.  hell, people will still kill and rape and steal and assault.  maybe we should just eliminate the legal consequences of that anyway.

fourth, why in god's name do you people want to give the government something more to tax?  are you nucking' futs?  [rolleyes]

fifth, and this is for those who want me to stop buying gas because it supports the terrorists, did any of you supporting the legalization of drugs ever stop to think that you're facilitating, even if indirectly, the destruction of lives?

[url]http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/index.html[/url]

[:D]

No, I've seen the damage done.

70% of you agree that drugs should be legal. Wow guns and drugs with full access to both, interesting.

With all due respect, you're missing the point entirely.  I don't believe I need to be a drug user or abuser to realize how devastating the "war on drugs" has been to our liberty and pocket books.

I suppose you think prohibition was a good idea too.

Oh, and you just admitted publicly you're a continuing illegal drug user which makes your gun ownership [b]illegal[/b].  I guess being an outlaw is fine with you as your willing to obtain controlled substances, use them and also lie on 4473 forms.

But your morally opposed to the legalization and taxation of drugs.

And you're busting my chops?

So you support prohibition, eh?  Better jump on your bandwagon to start banning that evil substance in your fridge.

You know what, you're right.  Our government should legislate morality.  We should pass laws to keep people from hurting themselves.  Makes perfect sense, but let's be consistent, ok?

Ban motorcycles.
Ban cars that can do over 70.
Ban airplanes for recreational use.
Ban guns.
Ban fireworks.
Ban skydiving.
Ban SCUBA diving.
Ban mountain climbing....

Let's make sure people don't have the means or excuses for hurting themselves.

You're right, there isn't.  That's because our government has created the victims by creating the criminal elements who engage in the illegal drug business.

The same thing happened with Prohibition, you do remember that minor event in history, don't you?

Take away the criminal element and now it's no more dangerous to society or others than legal drugs such as alcohol.

Do you support the prohibition of alcohol too?  If not, why the double standard?

Oh, and there is no such thing as "victimless gun ownership either".  How many children die each year because their parents couldn't live without their favorite toy (deadly weapon)?

Ridiculous argument, isn't it?

Yup, let's legislate morality.  We can't have stupid people running around, can we?

Let's ban homosexuality because it's disgusting and stupid.

Let's ban shooting because anyone who would keep a loaded gun in their house, ESPECIALLY with children, is stupid.

Let's make people go to church because not being a Christian is stupid.  Why waste your soul?

Never been drunk before and had a gun in the house?

Interesting.

We have school shootings -> ban guns
We have drug abusers -> ban drugs


You can't blame an inanimate object for the problems of society.  Some jackass  has to pull the trigger or pop the pill.

If education/concern/upbringing/morals is not the key, then we are truly doomed.

Let's look back when we criminalized booze, and project what it would be like to do the same with guns. Don't like drugs, but the money is going in the wrong direction as a black market venture. How do we change that?

GodBlessTexas, thank you for the most reasonable post I have seen. It is nice to know that there are some people on this board that still have some grasp on reality. ARlady and DOCPIG thanks, and everyone else who does not have their head up their ass, thank you.



Ahhh. I am not morally opposed to the legalization of drugs. I just don't think they should be legal. As far as the "war on drugs" comment I would say that it was rampant drug use that was damaging our liberty and pocket books.

Responsible drug use.....

OXYMORON!!

The next time you get sick, remember that!

Drug abuse is drug abuse, plain and simple.  Anything can be abused.  

Why not allow people to assisst the process of natural selsction? Hell, we are medically enabling people to live longer than ever, there are more of us than ever before, somebody has to die. Why not let it be the ones who think it is cool? I am obviously not talking about pot, since it does not kill on it's own, but there is plenty of stuff out there that will.  There was a time when Mother Nature would have taken care of these people on her own, then we stepped in, why not bow out now?

I believe that this thread is regarding RECREATIONAL drug use...NOT medical......

Anyone know know what I mean?


"Just for today!"


Balming

Think about this: there is rampant drug use in prison. The inmates have no freedom and are subject to whatever rules the warden can dream up. And there are STILL drugs. Nobody has ever been able to stop the black market in drugs, guns, or any other "evil" thing. You can allow the government to make this a facist state in the name of the drug war, and there will still be drugs out there. Yes, it is sad that some people take drugs and do bad things, but the fact that this happens is PROOF that the drug war does not work, has never worked, and will never work. It will never be anything more then another excuse to strip away our freedom. You claim to support the drug war because you have seen drug do bad things? Then the proof that the drug war isn't working is right in front of your face.

Is there victimless drug use? I know people who use pot. They haven't become addicted, stolen anything, killed anyone, or performed oral sex for drugs. I don't have a form 4473 in front of me (or remember the exact wording), but the appropriate question on the CWP application reads:

During the past three years preceding the date of this application, have you been:
a. Committed for the abuse of controlled substances, or been found guilty or convicted of a crime under the provisions of Chapter 893, Florida Statues, or similar laws of any other state, or had multiple arrests for such offenses within the past five years with the most recent arrest occuring within the past year?
b. Committed for the abuse of alcoholic beverages or other substances under the provisions of Chapter 397, or under the provisions of former chapter 396, Florida Statues, or convicted under Section 790.151, Florida Statues, or been deemed a habitual offender under the provisions of Section 856.011(3), Florida Statues, or similar laws of any other states?
c. Convicted two or more times under Section 316.193  Florida Statues, or similar laws of any other state for DUI of alcohol or a controlled substance?

Do you want you kids to be able to RESPONSIBLY use drugs? Do you want them to sit in the rooms of NA & AA? Do you want to be killed by a drunk driver who drinks responsibly or a person who uses drugs?
Yea legalize them but to be able to use them you can't drive, use a gun, or pilot an airplane. Just to name a couple of rights taken away.
I have no problem with people using Pot, but when my kids play with their kids don't smoke around them. I usually have their kids come to my house.
I will not post my own experiences since this is a open site and anyone can use it against you. But I will tell you I am Clean and I watch out for People Places and Things. Remember One is to many and a thousand never enough for allot of people.
Don’t legalize it but treat people with the proper resources. Not every one who drinks or Drugs should be in Jail. The Rockefeller law should be thrown out.

I voted NO!

Cause: DRUGS ARE BULLSHIT!!!!



This is MY opinion!    [rolleyes]

Legalize everything responsible.

Legalize everything irresponsible, just quit making excuses for the (ir)responsible parties.

Lets face it the war on drugs is a dismal failure just as prohibition was a failure with alcohol. You can't legislate morality in a free society.No none are victimless alcohol and nicotine have a heavy toll on society,but we can't stop people from choosing to smoke or drink anymore than we can stop them from doing drugs. The time has come for decriminalizing these activitys and spend the billions on education.As long as there is massive amounts of money to be made people will bring in or make drugs available. It kills me to see a guy that smokes 3 packs of cigarettes a day talk about how he can't see someone getting hooked on drugs. A matter of perception I guess.

Totally legal? NO

Legalized medicinal uses? YES

Mary Jane helps people with gloucoma, as well as helps ease the side effects of chemo-therapy and other cancer treatments.

Cocaine is used in rhinoplasty and other nasal cavity surgeries to control beleeding. (Yes, you can get Cocaine at the pharmacy in many hospitals. We had cocaine at UVa, IIRC.)


Scott

Nobody expects the "war on drugs" to be about completely eliminating drug use.  That's stupid. People will always get high, but the goals are more like reducing the number of unintended consequences and unwilling victims.

What about sugar?  Is sugar a drug?  Food is similar, but different.  You can stop doing drugs and alcohol, but you can't stop eating.

And for those who equate the "freedom" to do drugs with the freedom to own weapons, nowhere in the Constitution does it address the right to do drugs, whereas the 2nd amendment is pretty clear.  

It's just about trying to do as much as is possible, absolute abolition of anything is unrealistic.

But all those examples you cited don't save anybody, increase prices, decrease liberty, and increase the power of the government. They all don't work either.

Should we legalize drugs? There are really two parts to this question. Is banning drugs legal(ie constitutional) and is banning drugs the right thing to do?

Regarding the first question: That is also a two part question. The first part is Federal banning of drugs. That is emphatic NO. Nowhere in the federal Constitutional does it authorize BANNING of drugs. They can tax them, but that tax cannot result in a de facto ban(by have to large a tax that makes it unaffordable). The Art I Sect 8 clause that "Congress shall have power … to regulate commerce between the states" does not confer the power to ban any item. It only confers the power to ensure that commerce is unencumbered, ie by regulations by the individual states. Its purpose to to "make regular" the commerce. The power to ban drugs is left to the states, per the Tenth Amendment("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.")

That leads to the Second part of the 1st question: Is it legal or constitutional for a state to ban drugs? Well, the Federal Constitution is silent on this issue, since it is a wholly intrastate matter. This would have to be address on a state by state matter according to the individual state's constitution.

The 2nd Question is whether or not it is right to ban drugs. I would argue that it is NOT. I believe this for four reason: it infringes on liberty, the solution is worse than the problem, it increase the power of the government, and there are better ways to do it.

Banning drugs infringes on the liberty to buy and sell what one wants. That liberty is a cornerstone of the free market, and liberty everywhere. Once government controls what we can and cannot sell, they control us. That liberty is also part of the right to ones property, which allow one to do what one wants.

Banning drugs only causes more harm than the original problem. The banning of drugs has lead to shootings and fights over territory, because disputes cannot be taken to a court to be solved, so they must go to what they have left: violence. Instead of a few people dying from taking drugs, and a few people dying from their actions, we have many people dying from shootings and other violence resulting from drug activities. It costs the families money to deal with this. We also have money lost funding this "war" through taxation.

Anybody can plainly see that the "Drug War" has increased the power of the government. The government can seize money and property with just an accusation of possessing drugs, or even having to much money or the wrong kind of property. There is court and attorney costs trying to get one's property and money back. This war has bankrupted many people. It also kill many too. Many innocent people die at the hands of government agents, whether local cops, SWAT members, the DEA, and others. They bust into places shooting up the residents because of an anonymous tip or agent. It is later determined that it either was the wrong house or there was no drugs. This has happened many times.

Finally, there are other ways to handle it. Education is a good way. There is also laws from dating back before the drug war that can handle this. Murdering somebody, whether through shooting them or because the murderer was high, is still illegal. Fraud and assault can also deal with this. We don't need any more laws banning objects, but just enforcement of laws violating liberty.

These question were also raised before and during Prohibition, but for some reason people refuse to learn from history. They instead promote the "war" based on emotion and fear. At least during Prohibition they actually went through the Amendment procedure instead of finding the power in the "penumbra's and emanations" of the Constitution. They also woke up and saw the destruction wrought by Prohibition. Let's hope we will too.

A final note: I do not use nor have I ever used drugs. I cannot understand the reasoning that goes into using drugs. I would rather have full control of my mental facilities than "go on a trip." Of course, I DO believe in letting people make mistakes.

Exactly.  Tobacco use is on a serious decline.  Why is that?  Not because we banned it, that's for certain.  No, it's because money is being spent to educate the masses on the destructive nature of the drug.  It's now socially taboo to be a smoker.  Had we banned tobacco products (like some kooks proposed) we would see a HUGE criminal market spring up over night to supply the drug and then we would see people getting killed over tobacco turf wars... just like drugs and just like alcohol before it.

Those who refuse to learn from history are damned to repeat it.  Those who are for continuing the ridiculous "drug war" for the safety of society are in fact putting society at risk.   Plus, we are wasting billions of dollars on this foolish "war" which we have no hope of winning.  It's just a huge financial sink hole...  

Why can't I go up to a machine like an ATM and swipe my medical card that has all my medical history on it, put in my symptoms and maybe answer a few simple questions and get a prescription?

NO, I have to make an appointment to see some "Doctor" that will misdiagnose me, waste half my day and overcharge the F**K out of me.

IT IS THE F*****G WAR ON DRUGS and the strangle hold the AMA has on prescription drugs.

What exactly is in my fridge?  I guarantee you there isn't a drop of alcohol.  Had you read the entire post you might have read the part about AA and NA meetings.  Furthermore, I do not support reducing crime by making harmful things legal.  Do I support prohibition?  Not necessarily.  But I also have the mental capacity to understand that making one type or group of substances legal won't drive down violent crime.  It just shifts what illicit items people are willing to steal and sometimes kill for.

As I said, take the pespi challenge and tell me how the addictive effects of crack and heroin compare to a shot a bottle of beer or a shot of wiskey.  Show me someone who's blown a liquor store owner for a bottle of hooch.

God Bless Texas

Oxymoron?  Isn't that a new painkiller?

[:)]

Of all the people who argued that drugs should remain prohibited because they can hurt a person: does anyone really believe that the current prohibition actually keeps anyone from hurting himself with drugs?

Someone once said, don’t remember who, (must be from the “strong smoke” in high school) that arguing with a person who has abandon reason is like giving medicine to a dead man. The drug war was ludicrous and criminal from its inception. To those that would regulate what I can ingest in my own home, you understand nothing of freedom and the responsibly it demands.

War on Drugs = War On Guns = War on Liberty
           They could not be more similar

edited for spelling