What drugs would you legalize, and under what restrictions?

[TheWraith]

Okay, I just went off on another rant here about how much the murder rate in the US is linked to gang warfare for control of the drug trade. If you don't believe me, I suggest you read up on the Prohibition era--after it was repealed, despite the borderline hysterical warnings of the control freaks, the murder rate dropped like a rock, because the gangs no longer had the value of the liquor business to fight over. Legalizing booze denied the gangs of that era the cash they needed to operate, and legalizing modern day drugs would starve the current sources of violent crime.

So I wanted to ask DU: what currently illegal drugs would you legalize for recreational use, and under what restrictions?

Myself, I would definitely legalize pot, and place it under the same restrictions as tobacco or alcohol. I'd also legalize "low impact" drugs like peyote, salvia, and LSD under the same conditions. And I would consider legalizing cocaine, given an at least mostly effective means of regulating how much of it a person could buy in a given period of time.

[Jackpine Radical]

1. Legalize the less harmful stuff (pot, shrooms, etc.)

& decriminalize the rest.

Actually, I'd go for legalizing it all & providing treatment for those who want it.

The one that gives me the most trouble is meth--it's such a terribly destructive drug. But then, I don't think anyone would use it if they had access to "better" alternatives. Meth use really shot up when they cracked (no pun) down on coke distribution

[TheWraith]

54. The problem with decriminalization is that you get all the negative effects without the positives.

I.e. you have the negative effects of a drug like cocaine being legal, in that it has an expanded market and the potential for people to abuse it. But you also have the bad effects of it being illegal, which is the black market of production and distribution.

[Luminous Animal]

2. I would legalize marijuana and decriminalize all drug USE.

I would use the Portuguese model of decriminalization.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=12476

[alfredo]

36. Legalize pot for adult use. Allow X amount of plants

to be grown at a time without a business license.

Addictive drugs should be treated as a health problem, not a legal problem.

[jody]

3. Legalize most with laws that punish those under the influence who harm others. n/t

[VoteProgressive]

4. We need to reduce the Pot laws to a fine at most, not sure we should legalize it....

I think it might be more trouble than people think. And once legal, you can't go back.

[shanti]

12. not true

it was legal before it wasn't. and what about alcohol? your viewpoint on cannabis isn't a very progressive one. :eyes:

[VoteProgressive]

23. Well, without being snarky.......

Alcohol causes many issues in society that are not good issues. That is why they tried to ban it. That did not work out so well. Once legal there is no going back.
Pot was legal for a while. Every drug was legal for a while. That is not a good excuse.
I cannot prove alcohol consumption causes more good than bad. Neither can you. Except people like to drink it.
And I do think pot is less dangerous than alcohol.
But to legalize pot means you need to address a whole list of new issues it would cause. You might think it would cause no issues and that it could have no downside but I guarantee there would be some.
That is part of the decision making process.
I am not insulting your position, just discussing it.

[Warren Stupidity]

44. "But to legalize pot means you need to address a whole list of new issues it would cause"

Name one.

[gateley]

45. I've heard they banned alcohol because JP Getty didn't

want cars available that could run on alcohol which was an option at the time. He funded the Temperance Movement, ensuring people couldn't make their own 'fuel' out of alcohol. :shrug: Kind of like how the oil companies have continued to make sure for years that no other alternatives were available.

Here's a snip about the Model T, the first car affordable to most Americans:

The engine was capable of running on petrol, kerosene, or ethanol,<15><16> although the decreasing cost of petrol and the later introduction of Prohibition made ethanol an impractical fuel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Model_T

[Warren Stupidity]

43. " And once legal, you can't go back. "

What? Pot was completely legal up until the 1930's. Alcohol went from legal to illegal in the 20's, and then back to legal in the early 30's.

[Warren DeMontague]

63. More trouble than spending $40 Billion a year "fighting" it, and locking up cancer grannies?

Because that's what we've got now.

Legalize it, regulate it, tax it. If anything, it would be LESS trouble, because regulated it would be harder for kids to get. When I was in High School, pot was way easier to come by than booze.

[Alexander]

5. Salvia is already legal.

Personally, I think if all drugs were legal, regulated and taxed like alcohol and cigarettes are, it would practically eliminate gang warfare.

I don't think a lot of Americans like the idea of things like crack, heroin and meth being legal, so I don't see this ever happening.

But I contend that the legality of a substance has almost no effect on whether people choose to use it or not. Millions of people smoke marijuana, which is illegal. Yet there are many people who don't drink and/or don't smoke cigarettes, even though those are legal.

Plus, I'm of the opinion that if horrible substances like meth are being manufactured in a controlled and regulated laboratory, that it's better than people blowing themselves up with their own home made labs.

[ScreamingMeemie]

8. They made cigarettes illegal?!

;)

[Alexander]

10. Corrected.

[TheWraith]

55. Not everywhere in the US, and it's been proposed to control it nationally as a Schedule I drug.

Otherwise, I agree with you.

[Alexander]

60. That's been proposed countless times over the past few years and has never been passed.

[mike_c]

6. legalize all drugs and treat drug addiction and other problems as medical issues...

...or medical/psychological issues rather than legal matters. Prohibition destroys lives. Treatment gives folks an opportunity to rebuild their lives if that's their choice.

[phleshdef]

7. Completely legalize marijuna and decriminalize simple possession of every drug.

[Webster Green]

9. All of them, and give us back the Quaaludes too.

As alcohol prohibition ended, the federal agents needed a new enemy to battle, or they would be out of work. That was a big factor in pot prohibition.

Adults should be able to take advantage of any of the wonderful ways that are available to get high.

Legalization is effective at harm reduction where it has been tried. Removing black market incentives to reduce crime and violence is a no-brainer. :smoke:

[iamtechus]

11. Anything you can grow in your garden or basement. nt

[davsand]

27. I agree. If it will grow in nature it should be legal.

Seems to me that if it can be found growing in nature and consumed in that form it should never have been illegal. I think the manufactured stuff is less clear cut and should be kept illegal to manufacture. Users of the manufactured drugs should be offered treatment but not a criminal penalty, and distributors and cookers need to be treated like criminals.

It should be up to you what (or if) you use.




Laura

[ZombieHorde]

13. I would legalize all drugs and treat them like cars.

You would have to pass a test to get a license to use most of them. Marijuana would not require a license, but tobacco and alcohol would because they are extremely dangerous drugs in my opinion.

[tavalon]

34. That's a great addition to my already fringe ides.

[Uta]

14. Marijuana

Its so easy to grow, it should have a street value about equal to a stalk of corn.
If theres no money in it, criminals would lose interest in its trade.
Of course people shouldn't imbibe when driving or operating heavy machinery. That would really harsh the buzz, anyway.
Other than that, why regulate it.
The money society saves on pointless legal enforcement and incarceration, can be put to use on better purposes, or saved entirely.
So even without taxing Cannabis , legalizing/decriminalizing would save lots of tax money .

[Scuba]

15. Pot. No restrictions for anyone over 18.

[Vinca]

16. Legalize pot, no restrictions. It's a giant waste of taxpayer dollars

to have cops tied up on pot busts, not to mention the cost of trials and jails. Also, legalize a pain killer or two. If we can't have single-payer, we ought to at least be able to buy a few prescription drugs over the counter so we can treat ourselves.

[bullimiami]

17. ALL. Treat addictions as a medical problem.

Making drugs illegal doesnt stop those with addictions from getting them or something else that will get them high.

[Curmudgeoness]

18. The only way to accomplish what you are suggesting can be

accomplished is by legalizing all drugs. I have no problem with this, as long as you also tax it and use that money for drug rehab or addiction programs for those who want them. I would treat it like alcohol and tobacco with restrictions against underage sales.

To strip the drug cartels and gangs of power, all drugs have to be legalized. Added benefits would include taxation of the products and price reductions for drugs, which would lead to lowering the personal property crimes that are so often fueled by the money required to buy illegal drugs.

There have always been addicts, and there will always be addicts. The sooner we realize this, the sooner we can get to a place where our prisons are not full of dealers and addicts.

[Fla_Democrat]

58. How do you tax it?

Pot can be grown in someone back yard, or garage. Meth can be cooked up in in the back of a van, a kitchen. What, people will voluntarily pay the tax on drugs? Hell, most don't voluntarily pay the tax on mail order and internet purchases? So, we cut down the imported drugs and have a hella time collecting the tax from the drugs manufactured/grown in side the borders.

Then the jails aren't full for possesion... they are full for tax evasion.


:smoke:

[Curmudgeoness]

59. How do we tax alcohol and tobacco? It is possible

to make alcohol and to grow tobacco, but it just isn't worth it, yet. The only problem would be if they get too greedy with the taxes, making it beneficial to do-it-yourself. Quality would be controlled so that people would know what they are getting. It would be safer than bootleg drugs.

[Fla_Democrat]

61. We do make alcohol and tobacco

and again, the feds, er, the revenuers, sweep in and throw those people in jail, who make it with out their apporval (read pay them money), but let's take your example.

So, we set the taxes low.... so people don't try to bypass it.. (again, internet/mail order sales tax... few pay it now.) So, for quality control, we now have inspectors? Let the FDA do quality control? Maybe marketing and packaging? Ads during the super bowl? Made by a company for mass distribution? How else can one inspect and assure quality, unless it is in a regulated location? How do you stop the home grown from passing their 'sub par' junk on the streets? I know, we could have the police, 'check for a tax stamp', check their business license, make sure every dime bag or crack vial has the ol "inspected by #42" on it. We would make it no longer a don't do drugs, they are bad for you.. to a don't do drugs, unless we get our cut... like cigarettes.

We have taxes on cigarettes, in theory to help support treatment for smokers (sound familiar??), and yet people go to great lengths to smuggle them, buy them from reservations, over the internet (wow, there is that tax evasion again). Maybe "they get too greedy with the taxes," which leads to that activity.

Oh, and speaking of greedy, and taxes on home made (this wasn't even home grown, but just plain roll your own cancer sticks....)
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/mar/20/tobacco-tax-hike-rocks-roll-your-own-smokes-biz/news-money/
Almost enough to make one....... well, you know. ;)


:smoke:

[cleanhippie]

68. you seem to be overlooking how unmotivated people are.

Yes, one can brew beer (I do) and grow pot, but they do take time and skill. Distilling booze takes more, and cooking meth, even more (not to mention how dangerous and hard to get many of the ingredients are).
Considering the people choose to eat prepackaged food over cooking themselves, the general public will simply look for pot cigs at the store. We are inherently lazy, so.....

[Morning Dew]

19. One thing I'd do

is require anyone running for public office to use LSD at least once.

That would, at least, keep some of the worst moralizers out of the running.

[ZombieHorde]

20. I like your idea. nt

[w8liftinglady]

21. my partner, a cop for many years, said drug laws are insane.he favors complete decriminalization.

As a nurse,I would favor complete legalization of marijuana...especially because this would enable different delivery modes to be freely practiced.

decriminalization of all other drugs.

Living in Meth Mecca,I HATE meth...hate it. The victim does NOT belong in prison. she DOES belong in a very intense treatment program.

All things being the same,I see much more hazards from alcohol abuse than other drug groups.

[Kurmudgeon]

22. I'm just going to agree, you nailed it! Prohibition era crime has and is returning,.

[NYC Liberal]

24. All of them.

People are going to abuse drugs no matter what's legal and what isn't. And since using drugs is a non-violent, victimless crime, we should not be throwing people in prison for what they choose to do to their own bodies.

The real problem with drugs today is the violent gangs and the unregulated black market that a) has no controls over quality and what is put into the drugs, and b) sells to anyone with cash, including young kids. All of these would be eliminated by legalizing drugs.

Legalizing drugs doesn't mean a free-for-all. It means sensible regulation. There would be a minimum age - just like there is for driving, drinking, tobacco, gambling etc. Selling drugs would require a license, and selling drugs without a license would be a criminal offense. Like every other drug, currently-banned drugs would be monitored and regulated by the FDA.

The drug gangs would disappear because there would be no market. Anyone see any alcohol gangs anymore? Who would buy from a random person on the street, at a hugely inflated price, when they could just go to the store?

[HysteryDiagnosis]

25. Most certainly the placebo. n/t

[etherealtruth]

26. All of them

I am not a fan of of recreational drug use (a bit hypocritical secondary to my caffeine addiction) .... but, criminalization clearly does not help individuals or society.

As others have stated before ... I am all for VERY strict penalties for those that drive under the influence and those that are impaired and cause injury (physical, financial ....) to others.

[VoteProgressive]

29. Some drugs are just too dangerous. Like meth. It has to be controlled somehow.

If Oxycotin was 100% legal to make and sell from your home I think that would be a bad thing.

[etherealtruth]

31. Do you really believe we are controlling it now?

Is sending users to prison doing anything for society?

Do you believe more people would use meth ....? I don't

[VoteProgressive]

37. I think more people would use meth. And if there was no downside at all....

to making it and selling it, it would be cheaper and easier to get and more people would try it.

No proof either way. But I am not sure it is worth the risk.

But I 100% agree that causal users should not go to jail. It causes more harm than good.

But big time dealers should be locked up. Not for life but for a short time. It destroys people's life's.

[Warren Stupidity]

42. " I 100% agree that causal users should not go to jail"

So only serious users should go to jail? What does your statement mean? Who should go to jail for using drugs you don't like, why, and what is that supposed to accomplish?

[Warren DeMontague]

64. The best advertisement against meth is meth itself.

We need to let people make their own decisions, offer help and treatment on demand. Also worth remembering is that these drugs are all different and their abuse doesn't occur in a vacuum. Meth is popular in places where other drugs aren't available, and it's also popular with people who have to work 2,3 jobs to make ends meet. The reality is that the increase in meth abuse in the US has more to do with shitty, minimum wage wal-mart employment than any great fun time folks are having doing crank.

[Warren Stupidity]

41. "legal to make and sell from your home "

Uh no. Legal to purchase, as Oxycotin is now, does not imply 'legal to make and sell from your home'. Legalize possession. Regulate production and sales.

Methedrine was legal for 30 years without being a major medical problem. The massively hazardous illegal production of meth is a case in point for why possession should be legal, production and sale should be regulated.

[fittosurvive]

28. Everything should be legalized on the federal level as this is a matter

that the Constitution left for the states to regulate.

This would immediately end the medical marijuana dispute and result in the contemplation of wide range of ideas on how to best deal with this matter.

[roody]

30. all

[tavalon]

32. I'm way off the curve bee

I think all drugs should be legalized and on the shelves. I think the information to safely take any mediation or drug should be easily available and that medical professions take a proactive consultative stance. And no pharmaceutical company should be able to advertise their wares or in any mode are able to push for the use of one item over another.

[hwmnbn]

33. all, under every circumstance.

[JonLP24]

35. Legalize many

Probably the most common ones. Unpopular, I know, but keeping these substances illegal drives the business underground which leads to violence because disputes can't be settled by lawsuits or calling law enforcement. We spend lots of money and use valuable police resources trying to stop this when substances are still just as easy to get and millions in prison from drug usage since this "war on drugs" began.

[Poboy]

38. I would legalize drug reimportation and rights for government to

negotiate price. ...of legal drugs!

This administration are servants of corporations though, so even that is a pipe dream, let alone disrupting all the drug money Wall St. would miss through the illicit market.

[jberryhill]

39. Tobacco - I'd let businesses decide how they want to deal with it

[Warren Stupidity]

40. All of them.

There is simply no sane reason to lock people in jail for using any intoxicant. You want to use heroin? Have a nice day. Be over the age of 18. Buy it at the local pharmacy. Read, or not, the warning label that indicates the actual medical facts regarding the potential dangers of use and abuse.

[Festivito]

46. All legal. Corporate regulations on manufacture and distribution for over minimum-wage profit.

Tax the corporations. Anyone who wants help dropping the drug, gets help for free.

Check out Portugal's drug policy.

[vicarofrevelwood]

47. All because it is a medical problem not a social one.

[TheKentuckian]

48. Any and all. I would limit purchase to those 18 and above (lowering alcohol to that age)

and expect compliance with laws to protect the rights of others (ie theft, rape, murder, captivity, etc) while using substances.

[Xicano]

49. All of them! Yes, ALL of them! Why?

Simple. You cannot use the word freedom when you deny the most basic concept of freedom, autonomy over your own body.

The NERVE of anyone to even think they have any say over someone else's body is repugnant to freedom.

[saras]

50. I'd disappear all drug laws except for purity requirements

But, on the other hand, I'd hold everyone as responsible for what they did under the influence as if they had premeditatedly planned to do it.

You think you can drive drunk? Drive drunk. But if you kill someone, then you're a murderer, not the victim of an unfortunate accident. Wanna smoke pot while you run that crane? Or take prescription painkillers, for that matter? Expect a skill test on the crane before you get to use it.

Of course, this fantasy world would also have free universal health care that included safe, effective addiction treatment, available without stigma or penalty. And we wouldn't pretend that coffee and beer were food instead of drugs.

[Geoffrey_Lebowski]

51. All of them ...

I know there's a reasonable case to not legalize the real hard/addictive stuff like crack, meth, and heroin, but I actually feel the opposite about these drugs. It's precisely BECAUSE they are so addictive that they need to be legal.

AFA meth and heroin goes, there really are safer pharmaceutical alternatives that make you feel just as good ... stuff like methedrine and dexedrine are basically meth without the horrible random chemical component, and most heroin addicts would be very happy to substitute Dilaudid. And these work well consumed orally rather than via shooting/smoking/snorting, which cuts down the damage factor significantly.

Of course, abusing these 'prescription' alternatives will still ruin your life and looks and such, but a lot of the damage from these drugs comes from their illegality and hence their 'bathtub' nature and unknown purity levels (a big reason people OD on heroin is because they don't know from one day to the next whether they're taking 5% pure or 50% pure dope).

Also, anyone who's ever been addicted to 'street' drugs knows that it becomes very hard to be a productive member of society or keep your finances in order when you have to go out and chase the dope man every day and pay his exorbitant prices. If you could just reliably go down to the corner drugstore and get clean dope like dilaudid or methedrine @ $2 for a day's worth, many addicts could successfully keep their life totally together, perhaps indefinitely.

So that's what I base my argument on: if addicts could just go down to the corner drug store and get their stimulants or opioids at a price commensurate w/what they cost to produce (which is very little, really), both the individual AND society would be a lot better off. When you get rid of the profit motive you get rid of the gangs/turf warfare, the 'pushers' go away + you largely remove the need for addicts to go out and rob people to get money for their stuff. Plus you can tax the proceeds and use that money for rehab programs instead of prisons and it'd still be WAY cheaper.

[drokhole]

52. ALL Psychedelics...

...including low-level ones like cannabis. That covers all Phenetylamines (mescaline and MDMA), and all Tryptamines (Psilocybin, LSD, Ibogaine, DMT), available for personal and spiritual enlightenment, and as tools for understanding, and possible curing, addiction and other psychiatric diseases. Especially DMT. Here's a fantastic documentary on the matter:

http://www.esotericonline.net/video/dmt-the-spirit-molecule-2010

And here's the book that inspired it:

DMT: The Spirit Molecule:
http://www.amazon.com/DMT-Molecule-Revolutionary-Near-Death-Experiences/dp/0892819278

A great, deeply informative read that goes into even more detail than the film. And here's a great book on the subject of "drugs" as a whole:

Food of the Gods:
http://www.amazon.com/Food-Gods-Original-Knowledge-Evolution/dp/0553371304/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1299447893&sr=1-1

I also believe that there needs to be proper education on the subject of psychedelics as a whole, and that emphasizing proper Set and Setting is of great importance.

[Vehl]

53. these

Myself, I would definitely legalize pot, and place it under the same restrictions as tobacco or alcohol. I'd also legalize "low impact" drugs like peyote, salvia, and LSD under the same conditions

I agree with the above list.

Ive never done drugs or alcohol...nor do I smoke(and I do believe that these practices are detrimental to our health), however I support the legalization of the above on on the grounds of "fairness". The Tobacco and alcohol industry has a monopoly and they are more hazardous to human health than pot. If cigarettes and alcohol can be legal, I do not see why pot and shrooms cannot be.

[slampoet]

56. Cigarrettes allowed only after sex

Wine only with dinner.

Beer only after work.

X legal only at raves or burning man.

LSD must be consumed outside the limits of a city with a licensed guide.

You can only do cocaine in the same room with Charlie Sheen.

Meth would still be legal to anyone in the military like it is these days.

and if you're gonna smoke pot you gotta bring enough Doritos for everybody and you are legally disallowed from ever shouting "SKYNARD" at a live band ever in your life under penalty of death.

[eShirl]

57. If nothing else, at the very least, 100% legalization of all drugs at age 65.

[Warren DeMontague]

62. Legalize Pot and some others, treat anything else as a health issue, not law enforcement.

Offer treatment on demand.

Laws against driving under the influence or harming others should be plenty- we don't need to get government involved in what people do with their own bodies.

[kster]

65. None, I would decriminalize all of them, something like this...

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=portugal-drug-decriminalization

[JoeyT]

66. All of them.

With the restriction that none of them be sold to minors, a huge penalty for giving/selling them to minors, and tax them fairly heavily and use the money from the tax to fund rehab centers. I've got a feeling that would actually lower the number of people addicted to drugs in this country. Illegality isn't really a barrier to getting drugs, if it were we wouldn't have a drug problem. Instead it just drives the prices up and gets people that may not be criminals used to being a criminal.

I don't believe in telling adults what they can or cannot do with their bodies. Period. If someone commits a crime while under the influence of the drugs, prosecute them and send them to jail, same as we do for alcohol. There will be plenty of room there once all the people there for possession/distribution are let out. I doubt the amount of crimes committed by addicted people would be anything like the volume of crimes committed by people trying to control distribution networks plus the ones committed by addicted people that are happening now.

Of course that's what I'd consider the ideal, but I'd certainly take pot alone being legalized if I could get it. Legalizing pot alone would cause a dramatic drop in use of other drugs. Pot isn't actually a gateway drug, but dealing with drug dealers will let you build the connections to get higher end stuff. Very few dealers just sell pot, and the profit margin is a lot higher on the harder drugs. Well, that and the first time someone smokes pot they find out the entire anti-drug effort against it was basically a lie and automatically assume everything they heard about meth/crack/heroin is probably a lie too, which makes them more susceptible to high pressure sales tactics.

[MadHound]

67. Every single one,

I would put the same restrictions on them as we do with alcohol, ie purchase restrictions related to age and state of intoxication, not to mention restrictions on driving, etc.

Every single one.