Jonny - in countries where drugs are 'legal',they are actually decriminalised and this is what 'legalisation' is. It would seem that the activites/role of the pusher/dealer is greatly diminished as well as related crime. Naturally, these will never be erradicated and there will always be associated crime (theft,prostitution,etc) as drugs will still not be affordable to the masses. Also, this decriminalisation comes with a whole educational programme,etc.
I fully understand the 'scary' part of this - I have a teen. Thankfully she is making the right choices and, as it stands, I'm pretty confident she will continue to do so, though this does not mean I can 'rest on my laurels' when it comes to guiding her through these future choices she will be making. This is where education, parenting and nuturing comes into play. For all. Needs to be looked at as a whole.
"I've seen the needle and the damage done
A little part of it in everyone"
I'm not sure if Neil meant we've all been touched in some way by addiction, or that we all have the propensity to go down that road...kinda like we all have the potential to violently let loose, but use the tools we've hopefully been given to apply self-restraint, and consideration of potential consequences.
Children need to be taught to use common sense, to understand that there are repercussions, good and bad, for their actions. They'll always - despite (il)legality - get what they want, and experiment.
I really don't mean to come off as harsh on this.
Still trying to figure it out myself....those grey areas.
Have you actually read the reasoning behind decriminalisation? How in has worked? The pros and cons? As said before, it doesn't mean a free for all - drugs are still very regulated. No one says there would no longer be abuse or anything.... And yes - it is a choice. Hopefully, one will make the right one, or, as you say, they suffer the consequences. Again,as you said - if you raise them right, they will be fine (though you were talking about dogs, it applies to humans too!). I would say that there are more responsible people in our societythan otherwise. Plenty make the right choices.
And plenty do not but that's ok with you as long as your kids do? :?
there the wash my hands again syndrome hurts no one but the one using
crap
always ... not my kid
no gotta be some other parent less than me or some other child less then mine
ALL CHILDREN MATTER!
Really raise them right? many children who tried it once twice
got caught in the pleasure trap
they were raised perfectly 'right' with loving supportive good example adults
they are now DEAD!
get victims out of prison into treatment ...
lock up the parasites of our society and throw away the key
they are murderers selling, making this killer drug
Please, tone down the drama. It makes your posts hard to read
"I've seen the needle and the damage done
A little part of it in everyone"
I'm not sure if Neil meant we've all been touched in some way by addiction, or that we all have the propensity to go down that road...kinda like we all have the potential to violently let loose, but use the tools we've hopefully been given to apply self-restraint, and consideration of potential consequences.
Children need to be taught to use common sense, to understand that there are repercussions, good and bad, for their actions. They'll always - despite (il)legality - get what they want, and experiment.
I really don't mean to come off as harsh on this.
Still trying to figure it out myself....those grey areas.
Children are taught this ... but good common sense even some adults don't possess
a brain of a child does not fully understand consequences until age 25
with many factors working against good common sense during youth
the pleasure trap of CRYSTAL METH is like no other drug
if you don't want to come off as harsh on the subject visualize holding a dying child
search your heart for one you love dearly then visualize what that would be like
to be there as they left this world
and realize it matters not whether they had a choice or not because they were a
pawn for this drug and they are DEAD
Have you actually read the reasoning behind decriminalisation? How in has worked? The pros and cons? As said before, it doesn't mean a free for all - drugs are still very regulated. No one says there would no longer be abuse or anything.... And yes - it is a choice. Hopefully, one will make the right one, or, as you say, they suffer the consequences. Again,as you said - if you raise them right, they will be fine (though you were talking about dogs, it applies to humans too!). I would say that there are more responsible people in our societythan otherwise. Plenty make the right choices.
And plenty do not but that's ok with you as long as your kids do? :?
there the wash my hands again syndrome hurts no one but the one using
crap
always ... not my kid
no gotta be some other parent less than me or some other child less then mine
ALL CHILDREN MATTER!
Really raise them right? many children who tried it once twice
got caught in the pleasure trap
they were raised perfectly 'right' with loving supportive good example adults
they are now DEAD!
get victims out of prison into treatment ...
lock up the parasites of our society and throw away the key
they are murderers selling, making this killer drug
Please, tone down the drama. It makes your posts hard to read
All due respect to you, Pandora, my intent of not wanting to come off harsh has nothing to do with the visualization you've mentioned (which I have, each time you've mentioned it).
All due respect to you, Pandora, my intent of not wanting to come off harsh has nothing to do with the visualization you've mentioned (which I have, each time you've mentioned it).
how could you be harsh on the subject if you can feel what this drug is doing to our children?
to society
Either you think it should be legalized or you do not
or don't know I guess
This whole freedom of choice thing is goofy as well. For most things, yes; for some things, no. Remember, people in society are irresponsible and make bad choices. Most people need regulation.
What about taking responsibility for your choices, good or poor? This said in addition to the concepts of education / rehabilitation.
Absolutely. One should take responsibility for their actions and choices. The problem is the 'spillover' (problems responsible society did not bring upon themselves and are forced to deal with such as crime, reckless behaviours, rehabilitation costs, etc.).
These hard drugs do not just affect the user. There is a major impact on the fabric of society through their usage and this impact would intensify with easier access and a lenient attitude towards them.
In that clip Friedman elaborates on a number of points made on this thread though he is a bit more eloquent!
I thought it was interesting when he brushed upon how substances like crack might not even exist were it not for the pressures of an illegal industry. I wonder which other nasties may owe their creation to criminalisation - crystal meth perhaps? (That seems to be a very specific concern of some people here)
It's probably the instinct of most compassionate people to at least be sceptical of legalisation - even if it's just because you don't want to be seen as making an endorsement of something that has so many destructive effects - however, the evidence seems to suggest that the current prohibitionist stance creates additional, completely unnecessary damage.
A blanket, un-wavering rejection of any move toward legalisation is probably only made by those who value evidence slightly less than the pro-legal support. Or even, it would seem, define evidence as only what they have had first hand experience of. (This is by no means meant to suggest that these experiences weren't horrifying)
Nobody without learning difficulties has opted for legalisation without considering the bigger picture. We can all appreciate how counter-intuitive it seems to make something so obviously awful legal - but it does seem as though we could make it considerably less awful if we do.
Milton Friedman - Why Drugs Should Be Legalized
That man seemed a bit creepy to me ...
Creepy? I probably would've noted "Articulate", "Intelligent", "Educated" and "Reasonable" before "Creepy" but whatever helps you ignore the point I suppose.
Could you elaborate on the whole "no concept of consequence under the age of 25" thing please?
Milton Friedman - Why Drugs Should Be Legalized
That man seemed a bit creepy to me ...
Creepy? I probably would've noted "Articulate", "Intelligent", "Educated" and "Reasonable" before "Creepy" but whatever helps you ignore the point I suppose.
Could you elaborate on the whole "no concept of consequence under the age of 25" thing please?
Decriminalisation of drugs doesn't mean that you will be able to buy them with your weekly supermarket shop or just pop in the corner shop and get your crack. It doesn't mean no one will be punished for trafficking, etc. It means that resources will be used to tackle the root of the problem for users (mental issues, environmental ones, peer pressure, etc.), help those that need to be helped and, hopefully, reduce 'petty' (not so petty really but just to differentiate) crimes associated with drugs enabling the focus on serious crimes (eg trafficking, etc.).
I'm glad you said this. I think its easy to get caught up thinking about legalizing some drugs, and panicking about the effects as opposed to decriminalizing. (good LONG post/article by Lukin2006 on page 8 too)
I'm on the fence on this stuff. It scares me to think of how kids are getting their hands on the really bad drugs (meth, coke, etc) But I have to wonder if the asshole pushers who give roxys to every 15 year old they can find, will die off if its decriminalized. Kids are dying from overdoses, the main question is - wold it get worse or better if decriminalized? I think its hard to say.
I have dealt with several people dying of drugs. I found my neighbor after his heart exploded (coke overdose I think) and he fell face first on the tile floor, smashing his face in. He died in the biggest pool of blood i've ever seen. But I remember the two thugs I saw in his yard a few days prior (likely his dealers). Would they still be dealing these drugs if they were decriminalized?
I've also known several people who have died from cigarettes, and a a few from alcohol. These are all very bad things depending on how they're used. Its just too hard to compare alcohol, cigs, pot, meth, etc...they are all so different.
Basically it comes down to - how easy would it be for kids to get them, and without the stigma, would it be a big deal anymore?
It just makes no sense criminalizing users...giving them a criminal record in many cases will lead them further into crime.
That article I posted could/likely will happen in Canada...and it was only a few years ago it looked like at the very least marijuana would be de-criminalized.
I have no problem not charging users of any drug.
I don't know the stats but I bet more people die from guns every year than drugs...ban them
cigarettes, booze...ban them all...
Prohibition does not work.
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
Can someone take a stab at creating a scenario for me... sort of the chain of events, cause and effect, of what might happen if we legalized hard drugs? I'm just curious about how it would all work.
Say everything was suddenly legalized, would there be regulations in place for quality control? Would manufacturers have to be licensed? I'm just wondering if this were the case, would there not still be a black market for cheaper, poorer quality drugs?
What's the best care scenario/outcome of legalization?
I can very clearly see both sides of the argument. I honestly doubt that legalization is something that will occur anytime in the near future (although I'm not an expert on this sort of thing, so who knows), but I'm still very interested in the debate.
I guess every government who may potentially decriminalise drugs will have a different way of going about it, depending on their economy, their culture, the divergence/size of the various socio-econonic groups in their country. Can't answer your questions but maybe googling some 'serious' reference about Portugal may give some insight as to what they did and how it was handled.
Godfather, as your trusted Consigliere all I can tell you is that there's a lot of money in that white shit.
If it is legalized we lose a lot from our income.
this drug stuff is dirty business and tell everybody in the family to stay away from it,....how much is "A LOT"?
Godfather.
Millions!
Adelaide 17/11/2009, Melbourne 20/11/2009, Sydney 22/11/2009, Melbourne (Big Day Out Festival) 24/01/2014
Can someone take a stab at creating a scenario for me... sort of the chain of events, cause and effect, of what might happen if we legalized hard drugs? I'm just curious about how it would all work.
Say everything was suddenly legalized, would there be regulations in place for quality control? Would manufacturers have to be licensed? I'm just wondering if this were the case, would there not still be a black market for cheaper, poorer quality drugs?
What's the best care scenario/outcome of legalization?
I can very clearly see both sides of the argument. I honestly doubt that legalization is something that will occur anytime in the near future (although I'm not an expert on this sort of thing, so who knows), but I'm still very interested in the debate.
Regulations for quality control is a big advantage of the legalisation argument so yes, these would be in place and licensed manufacturers would be governed by them.
Also, there is likely to be a black market of sorts offering cheaper, more dangerous drugs of worse quality but that is exactly what we already have,...and it has a monopoly on the market. Offer up an alternative and see how it affects the statistics of deaths related to secondary substances in drugs. Let's see how taxable drug trade can improve the availability and quality of health care for addicts. Let's see how an audited industry better treats it's third world production workers that currently juggle deathly chemicals in otherwise grossly unsafe working environments for a pocket full of pennies while the Cartels earn billions,...and murder people to protect it.
Maybe the only way to take the business away from nefarious criminal types is to be better at it than they are and give the consumer a better, safer, generally fairer deal. I don't however, think that we'd be able to observe the most promising benefits of legalisation until a whole troop of developed countries got on board, and it wouldn't be optimally effective unless global,....but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.
I was hoping some would answer the above post ...
the people who want all drugs legalized
We'll all be doing crystal meth in the streets and bars. It'll be so fun!! You know? The killer drugs? I can't wait. They are going to have crystal meth vendors at all the playgrounds and schoolyards. Every kid will get killer drugs for their 15th birthday. Won't that be so exciting?
I was hoping some would answer the above post ...
the people who want all drugs legalized
We'll all be doing crystal meth in the streets and bars. It'll be so fun!! You know? The killer drugs? I can't wait. They are going to have crystal meth vendors at all the playgrounds and schoolyards. Every kid will get killer drugs for their 15th birthday. Won't that be so exciting?
I think there is one problem with the debate going on in this thread. I think there may be several meanings as to what decriminalizing all drugs would actually mean. Pandora has been facing some heat due to her strong stance that these hard drugs should remain illegal—and she has her reasons. However, after being directed to read up on Portugal's drug policy, I'm not convinced that this is far from what Pandora would like to see. (Correct me if I'm wrong, please)
The article says nothing about letting the manufacturers and distributors off the hook legally. In fact, it says “police are now able to re-focus on tracking much higher level dealers and larger quantities of drugs.”
Also, Pandora stated in a post back on page 9 “remove users from prisons... they do not belong there, they belong in treatments centers.”
So, perhaps there is more actually agreement than it appears, people are just caught up in the debate because there are different definitions of what legalization would actually mean.
Personally, I was thinking that legalization would mean that I could go set up my own meth lab and sell it to all my neighbours like the Avon lady, set up my own business, pay my taxes (and it would be their choice if they wanted to buy my product)... I know it's not a joking matter... but that's the easiest analogy I could think of. And this is something completely different from the Portugal scenario.
That's what was mentioned in various posts firefox - what some will call legalisation taking The Netherlands and Portugal as examples is actuall decriminalisation. Drugs in thse countries (including pot in The Netherlands) are still illegal.
I get your analogy - thinking it would have been a free for all. Though I'm sure big companies and the government would be getting a nice slice of the action!
Anyone with half a brain knows how bad meth, coke, heroin, and other hard drugs are. So there is no reason to preach to anyone here about which ones are worse. There is also no reason to preach about children using them. We all know that it is currently a problem. And that is the point, our system isn't working. The billions of dollars being spent on the war on drugs flat out isn't working. That money would be much better spent on education and an advertising blitz to shift culture even more against hard drugs. We have a billboard campaign where I live that shows before and after pictures of actual hard drug addicts. It is very eye opening to see the difference in appearance of these people. It's about time more money was spent this way. But instead we continue to waste money on prisons and other effects of the war on drugs. So Pandora can preach all the nonsense she wants about the children and the killer drugs. But her old lady ways are just making the effects of drugs on children and society worse. She just fails to grasp that because she is focused on her drama and fails to use any reasoned thought.
I think there is one problem with the debate going on in this thread. I think there may be several meanings as to what decriminalizing all drugs would actually mean. Pandora has been facing some heat due to her strong stance that these hard drugs should remain illegal—and she has her reasons. However, after being directed to read up on Portugal's drug policy, I'm not convinced that this is far from what Pandora would like to see. (Correct me if I'm wrong, please)
The article says nothing about letting the manufacturers and distributors off the hook legally. In fact, it says “police are now able to re-focus on tracking much higher level dealers and larger quantities of drugs.”
Also, Pandora stated in a post back on page 9 “remove users from prisons... they do not belong there, they belong in treatments centers.”
So, perhaps there is more actually agreement than it appears, people are just caught up in the debate because there are different definitions of what legalization would actually mean.
Personally, I was thinking that legalization would mean that I could go set up my own meth lab and sell it to all my neighbours like the Avon lady, set up my own business, pay my taxes (and it would be their choice if they wanted to buy my product)... I know it's not a joking matter... but that's the easiest analogy I could think of. And this is something completely different from the Portugal scenario.
I enjoy your thoughtful support... thank you
it is much more than I have received from some or may ever on certain topics.
Yes I have a strong stance and a very good reason for that...
I only want what is best for the children and do not think that is legalization because it sends
the message of condoning use.
Society chooses its laws to protect and guide, chooses those they feel are morally right
for the masses... for the children.
I don't think CRYSTAL METH use is right for ANYONE ...
can anyone here look at the pictures see what it does to a person
within days weeks months
and say "thats ok lets be sure to let people get that if they want it." :shock:
I value life too much for that. I will not write off the person who decided to try meth
for the pleasure and then be lost in hell. This is the scenario of this drug.
So of course treatment centers and no punishment for users this can be done
by additional protective user laws while CRYSTAL METH remains the illegal dangerous
killer drug it is.... that is the message society sends to the children.
That and extreme laws to imprison those profiting from it.
This is not a substance to control it is one to ban.
Other vices/ substances are here for pleasure used in moderation but there is no chance for
moderation with CRYSTAL METH there is no good use for it. IT KILLS it has no value
what's so ever in or for society.
I think there is one problem with the debate going on in this thread. I think there may be several meanings as to what decriminalizing all drugs would actually mean. Pandora has been facing some heat due to her strong stance that these hard drugs should remain illegal—and she has her reasons. However, after being directed to read up on Portugal's drug policy, I'm not convinced that this is far from what Pandora would like to see. (Correct me if I'm wrong, please)
The article says nothing about letting the manufacturers and distributors off the hook legally. In fact, it says “police are now able to re-focus on tracking much higher level dealers and larger quantities of drugs.”
Also, Pandora stated in a post back on page 9 “remove users from prisons... they do not belong there, they belong in treatments centers.”
So, perhaps there is more actually agreement than it appears, people are just caught up in the debate because there are different definitions of what legalization would actually mean.
Personally, I was thinking that legalization would mean that I could go set up my own meth lab and sell it to all my neighbours like the Avon lady, set up my own business, pay my taxes (and it would be their choice if they wanted to buy my product)... I know it's not a joking matter... but that's the easiest analogy I could think of. And this is something completely different from the Portugal scenario.
I enjoy your thoughtful support... thank you
it is much more than I have received from some or may ever on certain topics.
Yes I have a strong stance and a very good reason for that...
I only want what is best for the children and do not think that is legalization because it sends
the message of condoning use.
Society chooses its laws to protect and guide, chooses those they feel are morally right
for the masses... for the children.
I don't think CRYSTAL METH use is right for ANYONE ...
can anyone here look at the pictures see what it does to a person
within days weeks months
and say "thats ok lets be sure to let people get that if they want it." :shock:
I value life too much for that. I will not write off the person who decided to try meth
for the pleasure and then be lost in hell. This is the scenario of this drug.
So of course treatment centers and no punishment for users this can be done
by additional protective user laws while CRYSTAL METH remains the illegal dangerous
killer drug it is.... that is the message society sends to the children.
That and extreme laws to imprison those profiting from it.
This is not a substance to control it is one to ban.
Other vices/ substances are here for pleasure used in moderation but there is no chance for
moderation with CRYSTAL METH there is no good use for it. IT KILLS it has no value
what's so ever in or for society.
Anyone with half a brain knows how bad meth, coke, heroin, and other hard drugs are. So there is no reason to preach to anyone here about which ones are worse. There is also no reason to preach about children using them. We all know that it is currently a problem. And that is the point, our system isn't working. The billions of dollars being spent on the war on drugs flat out isn't working. That money would be much better spent on education and an advertising blitz to shift culture even more against hard drugs. We have a billboard campaign where I live that shows before and after pictures of actual hard drug addicts. It is very eye opening to see the difference in appearance of these people. It's about time more money was spent this way. But instead we continue to waste money on prisons and other effects of the war on drugs. So Pandora can preach all the nonsense she wants about the children and the killer drugs. But her old lady ways are just making the effects of drugs on children and society worse. She just fails to grasp that because of a lack of ability to reasonable thought process.
your mother must be so proud she raised a loving respectful child
And yes good money is going towards education and ads now to get the word out
more is needed
this wasn't here a decade ago when we needed it most so this is promising to people
who have been victimized
The prisons are to house those cooking CRYSTAL METH and those pushing it not the users
I am reasonable enough to be kind and respectful to even those I do not agree with
something you are not capable of ...
that is unreasonable of you
That's what was mentioned in various posts firefox - what some will call legalisation taking The Netherlands and Portugal as examples is actuall decriminalisation. Drugs in thse countries (including pot in The Netherlands) are still illegal.
I get your analogy - thinking it would have been a free for all. Though I'm sure big companies and the government would be getting a nice slice of the action!
I have to admit that I did sort of glaze over a few pages of this thread since I found some posts were getting a bit repetitive, although it appears I may now be one of the guilty . However, I did learn a few things regarding how the drug policies work in other countries. I think there is a great deal of misconception out there about how these policies actually work. I'm still not totally clear on my position in all this, but the more I know, the better
Although, with a better understanding of what "decriminalization" means, it doesn't sound all bad.
Oh, I'm sure the big guys would be getting their share. The drug precursors have to be bought from somewhere.... Although I not sure this idea of "legalization" would be a good idea.
Comments
I fully understand the 'scary' part of this - I have a teen. Thankfully she is making the right choices and, as it stands, I'm pretty confident she will continue to do so, though this does not mean I can 'rest on my laurels' when it comes to guiding her through these future choices she will be making. This is where education, parenting and nuturing comes into play. For all. Needs to be looked at as a whole.
"I've seen the needle and the damage done
A little part of it in everyone"
I'm not sure if Neil meant we've all been touched in some way by addiction, or that we all have the propensity to go down that road...kinda like we all have the potential to violently let loose, but use the tools we've hopefully been given to apply self-restraint, and consideration of potential consequences.
Children need to be taught to use common sense, to understand that there are repercussions, good and bad, for their actions. They'll always - despite (il)legality - get what they want, and experiment.
I really don't mean to come off as harsh on this.
Still trying to figure it out myself....those grey areas.
a brain of a child does not fully understand consequences until age 25
with many factors working against good common sense during youth
the pleasure trap of CRYSTAL METH is like no other drug
if you don't want to come off as harsh on the subject visualize holding a dying child
search your heart for one you love dearly then visualize what that would be like
to be there as they left this world
and realize it matters not whether they had a choice or not because they were a
pawn for this drug and they are DEAD
to society
Either you think it should be legalized or you do not
or don't know I guess
Perhaps you didn't intend to appear patronizing (as I didn't intend appear harsh), but like I said above, a grey area.
I do not see how asking someone to understand that that is patronizing
Absolutely. One should take responsibility for their actions and choices. The problem is the 'spillover' (problems responsible society did not bring upon themselves and are forced to deal with such as crime, reckless behaviours, rehabilitation costs, etc.).
These hard drugs do not just affect the user. There is a major impact on the fabric of society through their usage and this impact would intensify with easier access and a lenient attitude towards them.
I thought it was interesting when he brushed upon how substances like crack might not even exist were it not for the pressures of an illegal industry. I wonder which other nasties may owe their creation to criminalisation - crystal meth perhaps? (That seems to be a very specific concern of some people here)
It's probably the instinct of most compassionate people to at least be sceptical of legalisation - even if it's just because you don't want to be seen as making an endorsement of something that has so many destructive effects - however, the evidence seems to suggest that the current prohibitionist stance creates additional, completely unnecessary damage.
A blanket, un-wavering rejection of any move toward legalisation is probably only made by those who value evidence slightly less than the pro-legal support. Or even, it would seem, define evidence as only what they have had first hand experience of. (This is by no means meant to suggest that these experiences weren't horrifying)
Nobody without learning difficulties has opted for legalisation without considering the bigger picture. We can all appreciate how counter-intuitive it seems to make something so obviously awful legal - but it does seem as though we could make it considerably less awful if we do.
Creepy? I probably would've noted "Articulate", "Intelligent", "Educated" and "Reasonable" before "Creepy" but whatever helps you ignore the point I suppose.
Could you elaborate on the whole "no concept of consequence under the age of 25" thing please?
http://teenbrain.drugfree.org/science/behavior.html
there are many sites available not related to our subject at hand ... I just grabbed this
my kids being 28 and 26 now I see the difference
I understand this and how young brains work before and after fully matured
I don't ignore the point I totally disagree with him is all
It just makes no sense criminalizing users...giving them a criminal record in many cases will lead them further into crime.
That article I posted could/likely will happen in Canada...and it was only a few years ago it looked like at the very least marijuana would be de-criminalized.
I have no problem not charging users of any drug.
I don't know the stats but I bet more people die from guns every year than drugs...ban them
cigarettes, booze...ban them all...
Prohibition does not work.
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
More and more studies say that long term effects are not present with marijuana
Harvard’s Lester Grinspoon on marijuana prohibition
http://patients4medicalmarijuana.wordpr ... ohibition/
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
Say everything was suddenly legalized, would there be regulations in place for quality control? Would manufacturers have to be licensed? I'm just wondering if this were the case, would there not still be a black market for cheaper, poorer quality drugs?
What's the best care scenario/outcome of legalization?
I can very clearly see both sides of the argument. I honestly doubt that legalization is something that will occur anytime in the near future (although I'm not an expert on this sort of thing, so who knows), but I'm still very interested in the debate.
the people who want all drugs legalized
Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?
http://www.time.com/time/health/article ... 46,00.html
Ten Years After Decriminalization, Drug Abuse Down by Half in Portugal
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/20 ... -portugal/
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
Millions!
Regulations for quality control is a big advantage of the legalisation argument so yes, these would be in place and licensed manufacturers would be governed by them.
Also, there is likely to be a black market of sorts offering cheaper, more dangerous drugs of worse quality but that is exactly what we already have,...and it has a monopoly on the market. Offer up an alternative and see how it affects the statistics of deaths related to secondary substances in drugs. Let's see how taxable drug trade can improve the availability and quality of health care for addicts. Let's see how an audited industry better treats it's third world production workers that currently juggle deathly chemicals in otherwise grossly unsafe working environments for a pocket full of pennies while the Cartels earn billions,...and murder people to protect it.
Maybe the only way to take the business away from nefarious criminal types is to be better at it than they are and give the consumer a better, safer, generally fairer deal. I don't however, think that we'd be able to observe the most promising benefits of legalisation until a whole troop of developed countries got on board, and it wouldn't be optimally effective unless global,....but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.
Godfather.
We'll all be doing crystal meth in the streets and bars. It'll be so fun!! You know? The killer drugs? I can't wait. They are going to have crystal meth vendors at all the playgrounds and schoolyards. Every kid will get killer drugs for their 15th birthday. Won't that be so exciting?
The article says nothing about letting the manufacturers and distributors off the hook legally. In fact, it says “police are now able to re-focus on tracking much higher level dealers and larger quantities of drugs.”
Also, Pandora stated in a post back on page 9 “remove users from prisons... they do not belong there, they belong in treatments centers.”
So, perhaps there is more actually agreement than it appears, people are just caught up in the debate because there are different definitions of what legalization would actually mean.
Personally, I was thinking that legalization would mean that I could go set up my own meth lab and sell it to all my neighbours like the Avon lady, set up my own business, pay my taxes (and it would be their choice if they wanted to buy my product)... I know it's not a joking matter... but that's the easiest analogy I could think of. And this is something completely different from the Portugal scenario.
I get your analogy - thinking it would have been a free for all. Though I'm sure big companies and the government would be getting a nice slice of the action!
it is much more than I have received from some or may ever on certain topics.
Yes I have a strong stance and a very good reason for that...
I only want what is best for the children and do not think that is legalization because it sends
the message of condoning use.
Society chooses its laws to protect and guide, chooses those they feel are morally right
for the masses... for the children.
I don't think CRYSTAL METH use is right for ANYONE ...
can anyone here look at the pictures see what it does to a person
within days weeks months
and say "thats ok lets be sure to let people get that if they want it." :shock:
I value life too much for that. I will not write off the person who decided to try meth
for the pleasure and then be lost in hell. This is the scenario of this drug.
So of course treatment centers and no punishment for users this can be done
by additional protective user laws while CRYSTAL METH remains the illegal dangerous
killer drug it is.... that is the message society sends to the children.
That and extreme laws to imprison those profiting from it.
This is not a substance to control it is one to ban.
Other vices/ substances are here for pleasure used in moderation but there is no chance for
moderation with CRYSTAL METH there is no good use for it. IT KILLS it has no value
what's so ever in or for society.
Just proved my point one post later.
And yes good money is going towards education and ads now to get the word out
more is needed
this wasn't here a decade ago when we needed it most so this is promising to people
who have been victimized
The prisons are to house those cooking CRYSTAL METH and those pushing it
not the users
I am reasonable enough to be kind and respectful to even those I do not agree with
something you are not capable of ...
that is unreasonable of you
I have to admit that I did sort of glaze over a few pages of this thread since I found some posts were getting a bit repetitive, although it appears I may now be one of the guilty
Although, with a better understanding of what "decriminalization" means, it doesn't sound all bad.
Oh, I'm sure the big guys would be getting their share. The drug precursors have to be bought from somewhere.... Although I not sure this idea of "legalization" would be a good idea.