Legalize It All? Harper's Weekly

[Twangbanger]

...Costs money to lock people up, they aren't paying taxes, they aren't supporting their families etc....of the realities we get to pick from rehab is the preferred option.

They aren't beating up their girlfriends, either.

Supporting them may be _your_ preferred option. I'd rather have them locked up.

 

[cobber]

And if it's liberty to take the drugs of your choice, in the manner you choose, then isn't a govt-funded system of rehab in essence forcing someone else's morality on the drug user?

If I don't have the right to tell my fellow man not to use drugs, then how do I get the right to tell him how or how much he should use?

 

[phylodog]

I don't see rehabilitation as fixing much. Are they going to force it on people? If yes, that's no different than what we're doing now. If no, it is not a solution.

Incarceration keeps them away from my family, optional and endless rehabilitation does not. The rehabilitation route is also extremely likely to result in even more money spent than we're spending now. It won't take long and we'll be hearing sob stories about how it's cruel to take an addict, rehabilitate them and then just toss them out on the street where life is sooooooo hard they'll just end up back on drugs. No, no, no, we need to rehabilitate them then provide them a place to stay once they're all better. They'll need clothes too, some food and a cell phone. Then when they squander all of that away to get more drugs we will get to start all over.

I'm tired of compromises. Either fix the problem or don't, exchanging one problem for another of equal or greater value has gotten very old.

 

[Jludo]

They aren't beating up their girlfriends, either.

Supporting them may be _your_ preferred option. I'd rather have them locked up.

I believe beating your girlfriend gets you locked up regardless of any drugs you may or may not be taking. I'm sure we all agree that alcohol is a major problem in domestic abuse and should made illegal as well.

 

[Jludo]

I don't see rehabilitation as fixing much. Are they going to force it on people? If yes, that's no different than what we're doing now. If no, it is not a solution.

Incarceration keeps them away from my family, optional and endless rehabilitation does not. The rehabilitation route is also extremely likely to result in even more money than we're spending now. It won't take lone and we'll be hearing sob stories about how it's cruel to take an addict, rehabilitate them and then just toss them out on the street where life is sooooooo hard they'll just end up back on drugs. No, no, no, we need to rehabilitate them then provide them a place to stay once they're all better. They'll need clothes too, some food and a cell phone. Then when they squander all of that away to get more drugs we will get to start all over.

I'm tired of compromises. Either fix the problem or don't, exchanging one problem for another of equal or greater value has gotten very old.

I don't entirely understand, incarceration keeps who away from your family? I want to be able to do any drug I want recreationally, where does that hurt your family? Any corollary violent crime to drug use is still a crime. Decriminalize because any move to more freedom is a good move. Don't lock people up simply for doing drugs then deal with any freedom caused consequences at that point.

 

[cobber]

I believe beating your girlfriend gets you locked up regardless of any drugs you may or may not be taking. I'm sure we all agree that alcohol is a major problem in domestic abuse and should made illegal as well.

Since alcohol isn't illegal, how's that rehab stuff working with alcoholics? What's the 'cure' rate?

And the fact that users of a legal drug commit crimes under the influence of that legal drug would seem to support the concerns of some that legalizing presently illegal drugs won't eliminate all drug-related crime. Unless drugs are given away free, it seems obvious that there will still be those who steal/rob to support their habits. We're not talking free drugs, but rather legal drugs.


Or will there be some government program to distribute cocaine and heroin to addicts, free of charge? Details details...

 

[phylodog]

I don't entirely understand, incarceration keeps who away from your family? I want to be able to do any drug I want recreationally, where does that hurt your family? Any corollary violent crime to drug use is still a crime. Decriminalize because any move to more freedom is a good move. Don't lock people up simply for doing drugs then deal with any freedom caused consequences at that point.

I'm all for legalizing everything as I've stated several times. I'm not willing to agree at the cost of spending more money on those who choose to flush their life down the toilet. Unless they're independently wealthy, those who choose to become addicted to drugs will typically run afoul of the law and end up in jail which is not where my family is. Drop your attempts to rationalize more free services to the undeserving and you and I will be on the same page.

 

[phylodog]

Or will there be some government program to distribute cocaine and heroin to addicts, free of charge? Details details.

You can believe that there will be those in favor of that idea.

 

[Tombs]

Since alcohol isn't illegal, how's that rehab stuff working with alcoholics? What's the 'cure' rate?

And the fact that users of a legal drug commit crimes under the influence of that legal drug would seem to support the concerns of some that legalizing presently illegal drugs won't eliminate all drug-related crime. Unless drugs are given away free, it seems obvious that there will still be those who steal/rob to support their habits. We're not talking free drugs, but rather legal drugs.


Or will there be some government program to distribute cocaine and heroin to addicts, free of charge? Details details...

Why would there still need to be smuggling rings and gangs to sell drugs if you could easily buy them anywhere without legal issues?

It could be done as blue collar work without the criminal risks, which is preferable for everyone involved.

Everyone I've known who's done that line of work has done it because their record makes it exceptionally difficult for them to find honest work, so it turns into a self feeding cycle of criminal activity.

 

[cobber]

Why would there still need to be smuggling rings and gangs to sell drugs if you could easily buy them anywhere without legal issues?

It could be done as blue collar work without the criminal risks, which is preferable for everyone involved.

Everyone I've known who's done that line of work has done it because their record makes it exceptionally difficult for them to find honest work, so it turns into a self feeding cycle of criminal activity.

Why do gangs run cigarettes, which are legal? Plenty of drug users won't have the money to support their habits, even once the stuff becomes legal. What if some new homebrew drug comes on the black market, like say bath salts? Are we good with legalizing any compound people choose to ingest? Or just the currently abused ones?

 

[Tombs]

Why do gangs run cigarettes, which are legal? Plenty of drug users won't have the money to support their habits, even once the stuff becomes legal. What if some new homebrew drug comes on the black market, like say bath salts? Are we good with legalizing any compound people choose to ingest? Or just the currently abused ones?

They run cigarettes to sell to minors, like why they do the same with alcohol, GENERALLY.

If they don't have the money to support their habits, sure, some will turn to crime just like they are now. Chronic addicts are never going away, whether they're people who can't walk in the door when they get home without slamming a 6 pack or they're a bum shooting up heroin.

The reason why so many hard drug addicts lack the money to support their addictions is because they can't work. Those people will do anything for the next high, and you're telling me they wouldn't throw stuff in boxes at amazon if they could?

 

[Libertarian01]

The single most important rule that stuck with me from my Accounting 101 class was this, "Every single decision we make has both positive and negative consequences." In accounting we were talking about business, but I believe this premise applies to everything in life.

The factors that go into a decision making process are many. Then you come to which factor has the higher priority. Mother Theresa was a wonderful woman, but she didn't prioritize helping lift someone out of poverty by creating business and giving them a job. No, she prioritized saving their soul.

I once heard an American General defending giving aid to another country. He put it this way, "We can spend $100 million to help stabilize them or $2 billion in military spending fighting insurgents." Do we "stand on principle" and refuse to give handouts and deal with the military costs or are we pragmatic and simply give the aid to avoid the military expenditures?

If all drugs become legalized we will have a lot of problems. No doubt about it. We may have more experimentation among the youth and more expenditures in programs to treat drug addiction. A very ugly set of issues, along with many I haven't listed.

However, I believe on the positive side the benefit of stripping organized crime of its tens of billions of dollars in tax free income, the reduction in violence in gang warfare, and the removal of other problems far outstrip the benefits of waging a war on drugs. I won't be naive and say that we won't have problems - we WILL! I just happen to believe that those problems will become much more manageable and less destructive to not only our nation but all peoples across the earth.

Am I right? Probably some yes and some no. It would seriously depend upon how such alterations to our legal system and society were to be implemented and enforced. If we legalize all drugs but tax the hell out of them then we haven't removed the desire for cheap pricing and the drug cartels would still have profit motive to exist. Of course, there are some folks that will always break the law just to break the law. This group on the low end of the bell curve simply cannot abide doing what anyone else tells them to do, and I am certain that our local LEO's can list names of folks that could probably make a good income doing some sort of legal work but they just can't play nice in the sandbox, so they get to stay in a little room from time to time on our dime.

I think time will tell as states and countries begin to grapple with the high cost of violent crime and the issues of drug addiction not going away.

Regards,

Doug

 

[cobber]

They run cigarettes to sell to minors, like why they do the same with alcohol, GENERALLY.

If they don't have the money to support their habits, sure, some will turn to crime just like they are now. Chronic addicts are never going away, whether they're people who can't walk in the door when they get home without slamming a 6 pack or they're a bum shooting up heroin.

The reason why so many hard drug addicts lack the money to support their addictions is because they can't work. Those people will do anything for the next high, and you're telling me they wouldn't throw stuff in boxes at amazon if they could?

To sell to minors...?

Gangs run cigarettes to avoid State taxes, not to deal to minors. And most proposals to legalize MJ prominently discuss taxing it and all the revenue that could be put to use doing great things.

Run a trailer full of cigarettes from NC to NYC. The profit margin would be large.


Yes. The vast majority of drug addicts do not have the discipline to work at an 8 hour job. Especially when they can steal your stuff and pawn it, or simply go on disability. And low income is low income, regardless of whether their drug of choice has been legalized or not. Unless the government gives it away. And who will produce these newly-licit drugs? How will it be distributed? Will there be an enormous State and federal regulatory apparatus to go with it? (Hint: yes)

There is an enormous problem out there, interwoven with drug abuse. In order to become an addict of illegal drugs, you have to engage in criminal thinking. In order to become an alcoholic, you do not.

Some of that will magically change if drugs are legalized, but for the most part, you will still have a large degree of criminality involved with drug use. And remember, if you force someone into rehab, you're committing the same moralistic fallacy that the legalizers accuse the prohibitionists of.

 

[Denny347]

Since alcohol isn't illegal, how's that rehab stuff working with alcoholics? What's the 'cure' rate?

And the fact that users of a legal drug commit crimes under the influence of that legal drug would seem to support the concerns of some that legalizing presently illegal drugs won't eliminate all drug-related crime. Unless drugs are given away free, it seems obvious that there will still be those who steal/rob to support their habits. We're not talking free drugs, but rather legal drugs.


Or will there be some government program to distribute cocaine and heroin to addicts, free of charge? Details details...

Anyone who thinks legalization will eliminate all drug crimes are fools. However, it is likely to eliminate a lot of crime. Criminals will be criminals, drugs, alcohol, gambling, whatever. I do not have the rehab rates for alcohol, however, why would that factor into legalization? Since my father chooses to be a homeless alcoholic, should that support a alcohol ban? There are those that can use drugs recreationally, like alcohol, and there are those who are hooked after one hit. That is irrelevant.

 

[cobber]

Anyone who thinks legalization will eliminate all drug crimes are fools. However, it is likely to eliminate a lot of crime. Criminals will be criminals, drugs, alcohol, gambling, whatever. I do not have the rehab rates for alcohol, however, why would that factor into legalization? Since my father chooses to be a homeless alcoholic, should that support a alcohol ban? There are those that can use drugs recreationally, like alcohol, and there are those who are hooked after one hit. That is irrelevant.

Rehab rates for alcohol should disabuse people of the notion that rehab will cure addicts. Some it will, some it won't. Some people cure themselves without rehab. Others do program after program with nothing to show for it.

Legalization is not the panacea some would have it to be.

And liberty implies the freedom to abuse that liberty.

Won't be all unicorns and rainbows. In fact, it probably won't be much more different than the present, unless we stop imprisoning dealers (which even Portugal does)...

 

[Denny347]

Won't be all unicorns and rainbows. In fact, it probably won't be much more different than the present, unless we stop imprisoning dealers (which even Portugal does)...

Even if crime rates didn't change, the Billions currently spent could be put to better use. Well, assuming we get a Congress worth a crap.

 

[Jludo]

To sell to minors...?

Gangs run cigarettes to avoid State taxes, not to deal to minors. And most proposals to legalize MJ prominently discuss taxing it and all the revenue that could be put to use doing great things.

Run a trailer full of cigarettes from NC to NYC. The profit margin would be large.


Yes. The vast majority of drug addicts do not have the discipline to work at an 8 hour job. Especially when they can steal your stuff and pawn it, or simply go on disability. And low income is low income, regardless of whether their drug of choice has been legalized or not. Unless the government gives it away. And who will produce these newly-licit drugs? How will it be distributed? Will there be an enormous State and federal regulatory apparatus to go with it? (Hint: yes)

There is an enormous problem out there, interwoven with drug abuse. In order to become an addict of illegal drugs, you have to engage in criminal thinking. In order to become an alcoholic, you do not.

Some of that will magically change if drugs are legalized, but for the most part, you will still have a large degree of criminality involved with drug use. And remember, if you force someone into rehab, you're committing the same moralistic fallacy that the legalizers accuse the prohibitionists of.

I'm not an expert but from what I understand the most recent heroin epidemic stems from people becoming addicted to prescription opiates then switching to illegal ones like heroin.

 

[Jludo]

Also from the article:


I started to ask Ehrlichman a series of earnest, wonky questions that he impatiently waved away. “You want to know what this was really all about?” he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”

 

[phylodog]

I'm not an expert but from what I understand the most recent heroin epidemic stems from regular people becoming addicted to prescription opiates then switching to illegal ones like heroin.

Stop and think for a moment about why that is your understanding. I'm in no way attempting to insult you but consider the push in this country to paint everyone as a victim. All we hear are excuses for people and attempts to deflect blame from the individual onto society. It is well beyond counter productive and has significantly damaged this country.

I just took two hydrocodones this morning. I've been taking pain medication all day, every day since February 9th when I had shoulder surgery. I am not going to enjoy the experience when I no longer have the medication at my disposal. I ran out a week ago Friday and decided not to refill the prescription, that it was time to be done with it. It was a miserable weekend and I was yelled at during my appointment on Monday and told that when it is time for me to stop taking pain meds the doctors will let me know. When that day comes and I take the last tablet I know from prior experience that I am going to experience some difficulties once the meds are no longer being introduced into my system. It is as that moment that I face a decision. The decision to accept the difficulties for what they are and deal with them or go out in search of an alternative whether that be illegally buying prescription pills or searching for someone to provide me with a substitute. That is my decision. I have not been victimized by doctors nor do I have a legitimate excuse for willingly going the way of an addict.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I understand that people don't like the costs to society of drug enforcement and the resulting crime. That is a very visible and reasonably quantifiable problem. I just wonder how many are intellectually honest enough to consider the downsides to full decriminalization.

First, drug use will rise by a large amount once prices drop and legal restrictions are removed. There will be more people losing or never being able to gain jobs due to failed drug tests. This will drive a lot of people to worse economic conditions than our current world. More accidents of all forms leading to more injured innocents. Peoples lives ruined (both bystanders and drug users). More jobs for lawyers and doctors as drug use rises (I can hear the cheers now in certain sectors).

Why do you say it will rise by a large amount? Did alcohol use rise by a large amount after prohibition? Has cannibis use rose by a large amount after legalization in what 23 states now? 23 have medical MJ 4 of them plus DC have recreational. What happened in Portugal when they decriminalized all drugs?

One question, and I don't know the answer. Can all drug tests differentiate between drug use on the job and on your own time?

Can all? No. Can some? Yes. They can tell if you are currently on them. Blood tests for instance can test for the active substances, which will show if you are currently on them. Urine usually tests for metabolites, which will tell if you have used in the last 24hrs or so up to a month or more depending on type of drug and frequency of use.

With the utmost respect this sounds like something very similar to "The streets will run red with blood" every time gun laws are relaxed. Because Portugal's
decriminalization of drugs show the opposite of what you are saying https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal

They even discuss it in the article linked on pg 2.

You're right about not legislating morality.......but I don't want to finance all of the dead beat dumb a$$ drug users by way of tax payer funded treatment centers. If you want to let all of the druggies die in the street....legalize away. If you want to pay for all of the extra crimes that go with drug use ....legalize away.

You are already financing them. Prison/jail and they can if they wish get treatment while in. So your not only paying for the treatment but more.

Agreed but I would also add that free people should have the right to not support others.

I can agree with that.

You started off strong then failed horribly. If I'm going to be forced to hand over money one way or the other I'd prefer spending it to keep scumbags away from my family, not paying for their "treatment" in the halfway house bought with tax money across the street.

I prefer not to be held accountable for the decisions of others. I've never been struck down with addiction by standing in an elevator with an addict. It may be a medical condition but it's a chosen medical condition.

I don't see an endless offering of "treatment" paid for by those who choose not to become addicts as a viable solution. Sorry.

Legalize drugs, all drugs, do it tomorrow. Spend a bit of time educating kids about the meaning of the word accountability (most schools have banned the word these days). Let the cards fall where they may.

Where do you get that it would be endless offering of treatment?

I don't find the possibility of ending the war on drugs and reducing taxes as a result to be unrealistic. If given the option of continuing as we are or legalizing and spending the same money to provide more free **** to those who refuse to earn it, I'll stick with what we've got.

No one is owed anything; not on this planet, not in this country, not in this life. I'm tired of hearing excuses as to why that isn't true when it absolutely is.

Per the article the US govt estimates $1 spent on treatment, saves about $7 in I believe enforcement/interdiction/incarceration. And why not use taxes on the drugs to fund the treatment? You know if they legalize them, they are going to tax them.

And if it's liberty to take the drugs of your choice, in the manner you choose, then isn't a govt-funded system of rehab in essence forcing someone else's morality on the drug user?

If I don't have the right to tell my fellow man not to use drugs, then how do I get the right to tell him how or how much he should use?

Your assuming treatment would be mandatory.

Since alcohol isn't illegal, how's that rehab stuff working with alcoholics? What's the 'cure' rate?

And the fact that users of a legal drug commit crimes under the influence of that legal drug would seem to support the concerns of some that legalizing presently illegal drugs won't eliminate all drug-related crime. Unless drugs are given away free, it seems obvious that there will still be those who steal/rob to support their habits. We're not talking free drugs, but rather legal drugs.


Or will there be some government program to distribute cocaine and heroin to addicts, free of charge? Details details...

Depends, are you talking those that voluntarily seek treatment or those who are forced(court order,etc) to get treatment? Best I can find is somewhere between 40-60% relapse rate for drugs. But I believe that includes both voluntary and involuntary.

ETA and a govt program to distribute? Ever hear of methadone clinics?