Legalizing Drugs

Well, I was confronted with this issue of legalizing marijuana in my college English class. What are all of your thoughts on this issue? Should marijuana be legalized because of the possible economic effects it could have on the country or should it continue to be illegal (since there are ethical stances behind the subject)?

Marijuana should be legal and not just because of the economy. Hell, I've never even smoked it, but it's still stupid, in my opinion, for it to be illegal while alcohol isn't.

If you wanna talk ethics vs economy here's a little wrench. Currently the US is the top arms exporter in the world. It's one of the few things we export more than any other nation. This means that movements to end conflicts around the world are counter intuitive to our economic interests.

Now if America were to legalize and export marijuana instead, would that be ethically worse than what we already produce? Arms dealership prospers in a world of malevolence. A demand for marijuana is something that can prosper without bloodshed.

Honestly, that it's illegal in the first place was due to false accounts and exaggerations of how dangerous it could be. Marijuana is not a chemically addictive substance like tobacco, heroin, or cocaine. Arguments for it being a gateway drug do not take causality into account. Is marijuana a gateway drug because it naturally causes people to seek more dangerous highs or is this merely the result of it being confined to the same market as other more dangerous substances?

I think it should be legalized, it would create many jobs, eliminate crime, and get people who really weren't all that bad out of jail, allowing them to contribute to society once more.

I also think it would be slightly harder for children to attain it. I know kids can get basically anything, but as far as I am aware, marijuana is attainable much more easily than alcohol is it not? At least now the distributors will be forced to sell only to adults.

Also to my knowledge, much of the marijuana propaganda is based on very old sources, dating back to the 70's and 80's.

On top of the job's and industry created, we could tax the hell out of it, and people will buy it.

I think it's a clear decision honestly.

Slightly editted from a previous post in a previous thread:

I would vehemently disagree that drugs whose sole purpose are to intoxicate the user should ever be legal, including alcohol.

Obviously the crime rate will go down if you legalise the dealing and possession of drugs, because suddenly activities that were once criminal no longer will be, so by repealing those laws you automatically get a decrease in crime levels because they're no longer criminal.

Perhaps legalizing those drugs might lead to a reduction in other types of crime, you say. But it might lead to an increase in others. For example, alcohol is perfectly legal, but fights break out everywhere all the time because people become intoxicated on it, leading to an increase in violent crime. Some idiots insist on driving after drinking, which has led to more than a few deaths. I need not continue - criminalizing alcohol would make it harder for the average Joe to get his drink, and as such would lead to a net decrease in violent crime and drunk driving in and of itself.

Weed, again an intoxicant, but not a violent intoxicant, you will be quick to remind me. I agree, but it is no less dangerous for it. Considering that every time someone chooses to get high they choose to cloud their ability to judge and think rationally, they put themselves and anyone around them in danger. I've heard more than a few stories of people who get high on pot, reach the "munchies" stage of the intoxication, go put something on to cook, and then sit down. Cannabis ****s with your short term memory, so they forget they put food on while they shift into the "stoner" phase, which is the phase at which you laze about doing nothing and still forget you have the food on. Long story short, they and everyone in the house suffer the results of a chip pan fire. Willingly putting yourself in a condition where you put others at risk due to your inability to think rationally should not be facilitated.

Obviously, some drugs have benefits. Even weed has its use in medicine, but that's where it must stay, where the user is looked after by hospital staff. Painkillers have every day use, and though people can get addicted, in moderation they're relatively fine. This is because the harm or risk they cause to society is less than their benefit to society - minor side-effects versus the reduction or removal of pain. Sleeping pills allow you to get a good night's sleep, if that's what they're being used for, with again relatively few if any side-effects. A main point to note is that medicines generally do not have an intoxicating effect, and if they do, their purpose is not to induce a state of intoxication, unlike many of these drugs which are or should be criminalized.

In summary: every time you become intoxicated, you put those around you at risk. If intoxicants for the sake of intoxication are to be legalised, their users must be isolated for the period of their use. Otherwise, keep them illegal. This way, those responsible enough to use them without drawing attention to themselves by behaving dangerously will be able to get away with it, and those not responsible enough will.

Before anyone starts to criticize my post, I have indeed said that I believe intoxication is itself harmful. This does not mean I think all things that do have a risk must be eliminated, such as sharp objects, crowbars, cars, and so on. I have formed my opinion based on a formula of societal benefit versus societal harm. One person enjoying being intoxicated puts more people around him at risk every time he does so. Societal benefit = nil, only one person gets off for a bit. Societal harm - potentially great, as more responsible people could be harmed, or multiple people could be harmed by the irresponsible intoxication of one person. Please keep this simple statement, "societal benefit versus societal harm", in mind for all criticisms.

Yes. All drugs should be legalized. Starting with marijuana.
I think it is ridiculous that it is illegal. It is a harmless plant, for heaven's sake.
And basically what this guy^ has said. It would create jobs, the government could tax it, and there wouldn't be so much time and money wasted on locking pot heads and pot dealers up.

Marijuana is not even as bad as alcohol, in my opinion.

Originally Posted by ValaVarda

Yes. All drugs should be legalized. Starting with marijuana.
I think it is ridiculous that it is illegal. It is a harmless plant, for heaven's sake.
And basically what this guy^ has said. It would create jobs, the government could tax it, and there wouldn't be so much time and money wasted on locking pot heads and pot dealers up.

Marijuana is not even as bad as alcohol, in my opinion.

One thing not being as bad as another doesn't mean it is good. It just means it's less bad.

Yeah, I see no real reason as to why it should remain illegal. One less motivation for criminal organizations to exist and one more thing to entertain ourselves with without fearing that the cops may come knocking at our doors, right?

Originally Posted by Flames of Valor

eliminate crime,

Well no ****. If we legalized rape, I bet the number of people being tried for rape would drop too.

Originally Posted by ValaVarda

Yes. All drugs should be legalized.

Marijuana may not have many drastic effects on the body, but drugs like heroine, meth, cocaine, etc. do. I think we should keep those illegal.

Originally Posted by Lord Zero

I would vehemently disagree that drugs whose sole purpose are to intoxicate the user should ever be legal, including alcohol.

I personally think any drugs are stupid. However, I think people should have the right to use them if they wish.

Perhaps legalizing those drugs might lead to a reduction in other types of crime, you say. But it might lead to an increase in others. For example, alcohol is perfectly legal, but fights break out everywhere all the time because people become intoxicated on it, leading to an increase in violent crime. Some idiots insist on driving after drinking, which has led to more than a few deaths. I need not continue - criminalizing alcohol would make it harder for the average Joe to get his drink, and as such would lead to a net decrease in violent crime and drunk driving in and of itself.

From my experience, living here in California(I don't know if things are different here), EVERYONE I know (with the exception of one of my friends and some of my family) smokes marijuana. And many of them do regularly. And they drive high all the time. The substance being illegal doesn't mean it is necessarily that difficult to obtain, brah. I could get some right now if I wanted. Easy.

Weed, again an intoxicant, but not a violent intoxicant, you will be quick to remind me. I agree, but it is no less dangerous for it. Considering that every time someone chooses to get high they choose to cloud their ability to judge and think rationally, they put themselves and anyone around them in danger. I've heard more than a few stories of people who get high on pot, reach the "munchies" stage of the intoxication, go put something on to cook, and then sit down. Cannabis ****s with your short term memory, so they forget they put food on while they shift into the "stoner" phase, which is the phase at which you laze about doing nothing and still forget you have the food on. Long story short, they and everyone in the house suffer the results of a chip pan fire. Willingly putting yourself in a condition where you put others at risk due to your inability to think rationally should not be facilitated.

You do realize that making something illegal is not going to make people stop doing it.
If a druggie wants his/her fix, he/she will get it.

In summary: every time you become intoxicated, you put those around you at risk. If intoxicants for the sake of intoxication are to be legalised, their users must be isolated for the period of their use. Otherwise, keep them illegal. This way, those responsible enough to use them without drawing attention to themselves by behaving dangerously will be able to get away with it, and those not responsible enough will.

People will still be around others while f***ed up, and get away with it. You can't stop every person who does it every time.

Originally Posted by Lord Zero

One thing not being as bad as another doesn't mean it is good. It just means it's less bad.

Well, if alcohol is legal then I see no reason for a less harmful substance not to be.

Originally Posted by Hell Hawk

Well no ****. If we legalized rape, I bet the number of people being tried for rape would drop too.

Drug trafficking and illegal cartels create crime elsewhere you know.

Smoking pot is not less dangerous than alcohol. Saying that would imply that smoking pot is dangerous to begin with, which to be honest, it really isn't.

Granted inhaling smoke isn't great for you, nobody smokes a pack or two of joints a day.

There's no use in my discussing this in detail, but drugs are **** and cigarettes are bad enough, no they shouldn't be legalized. I'd say about 60% of my friends are on drugs too, so don't think I'm just an outsider.

Seriously, it's horrible. I was on the bus going to see my girlfriend yesterday, and the guy in front was absolutely stinking of smoke ash. Not to mention how ****ty I think passive smoking is, I usually put my t-shirt over my face to keep that **** out of my system.


Legend: **** - "swear word".

What ethical standards are behind the subject?

Legalize marijuana. Absolutely. I'd say legalize certain other drugs as well but that may be off-topic, even though the thread title seems relevant.

Why is marijuana illegal when smoking tobacco is legal? Keep in mind that marijuana doesn't have to be smoked to get its effects: that's just the most common way to consume it.

Also, why is marijuana a Schedule I drug in the United States if there's a known medical usage? That certainly goes against the very definition of being a Schedule I drug:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia "List of Schedule I Drugs"

1. The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
2. The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
3. There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.

Originally Posted by Lord Zero

the "stoner" phase, which is the phase at which you laze about doing nothing and still forget you have the food on

Careful there. That's not necessarily true.

Originally Posted by Lord Zero

Long story short, they and everyone in the house suffer the results of a chip pan fire. Willingly putting yourself in a condition where you put others at risk due to your inability to think rationally should not be facilitated.

And if you're alone or with someone keeping an eye on you? Part of doing drugs responsibly, since there is indeed a responsible way to do them, is to not do them while others are around unless it is established that everyone knows you are on them, and to keep an eye on you. Doing them alone or with people who don't know you're intoxicated is potentially very hazardous indeed.

A few cases where people have been exceptionally handicapped in their dealing with drugs does not mean drugs as a whole are bad to use under any circumstances and thus should be illegal.

Originally Posted by GK: 5895/9999

There's no use in my discussing this in detail, but drugs are **** and cigarettes are bad enough, no they shouldn't be legalized. I'd say about 60% of my friends are on drugs too, so don't think I'm just an outsider.

Seriously, it's horrible. I was on the bus going to see my girlfriend yesterday, and the guy in front was absolutely stinking of smoke ash. Not to mention how ****ty I think passive smoking is, I usually put my t-shirt over my face to keep that **** out of my system.


Legend: **** - "swear word".

I understand the dislike of cigarettes, but I really don't see any reason, ethical or otherwise, for saying all drugs are ****. While some can cause serious physical and mental damage, there are others which present no apparent side effects.

Originally Posted by ValaVarda

I personally think any drugs are stupid. However, I think people should have the right to use them if they wish.

Too often I see people abusing the freedoms they are given, and the result is crime that harms others and harms society as a whole. People can't be allowed to just do whatever they please - they must only do whatever they please within boundaries preventing them from harming others unjustly.

From my experience, living here in California(I don't know if things are different here), EVERYONE I know (with the exception of one of my friends and some of my family) smokes marijuana. And many of them do regularly. And they drive high all the time. The substance being illegal doesn't mean it is necessarily that difficult to obtain, brah. I could get some right now if I wanted. Easy.

The fact that you can't just walk into a shop and get some means it's still more difficult than if it was legal.

You do realize that making something illegal is not going to make people stop doing it.
If a druggie wants his/her fix, he/she will get it.

And providing they can do so in a way that won't get them caught, which is usually by doing something stupid in public while high, then there is no problem is there?

People will still be around others while f***ed up, and get away with it. You can't stop every person who does it every time.

As long as no one is harmed, that is not my concern. If someone is, they'll understand just why the law is there when it comes down on them.

Well, if alcohol is legal then I see no reason for a less harmful substance not to be.

I just say that both of them should be illegal.

Originally Posted by Alonely

And if you're alone or with someone keeping an eye on you? Part of doing drugs responsibility, since there is indeed a responsible way to do them, is to not do them while others are around unless it is established that everyone knows you are on them, and to keep an eye on you. Doing them alone or with people who don't know you're intoxicated is potentially very hazardous indeed.

A few cases where people have been exceptionally handicapped in their dealing with drugs does not mean drugs as a whole are bad to use under any circumstances and thus should be illegal.

You know just as well as I do that many people aren't nearly as responsible as you are.

Originally Posted by Lord Zero

You know just as well as I do that many people aren't nearly as responsible as you are.

People can also be extremely irresponsible while operating heavy machinery such as cars, saws, etc., and even with smaller objects like empty kitchen glasses. That's like "telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it (Mark Twain)."

There is an ethical code to abide by.

Originally Posted by Erowid.org

February 29, 1995, Washington D.C.: The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, the nation's oldest and largest interest group dedicated solely to marijuana law reform, has adopted a set of Principles of Responsible Cannabis Use. NORML maintains that when marijuana is enjoyed responsibly, subjecting users to harsh criminal and civil penalties provides no public health benefit and causes terrible injustices. For reasons of public safety, public health, economics, and justice, the prohibition laws should be repealed to the extent that they criminalize responsible marijuana use. The key points to the Principles of Responsible Use are as follows:

1. Cannabis consumption is for adults only. Many things and activities are suitable for young people, but others absolutely are not. Children do not drive cars, enter into contracts or marry, and they must not use drugs.

2. The responsible cannabis user does not operate a motor vehicle or other dangerous machinery impaired by cannabis. Although cannabis is said by most experts to be safer than alcohol and many prescription drugs with motorists, public safety demands that impaired drivers be taken off the road and that objective measures of impairment be developed and used, rather than chemical testing.

3. The responsible cannabis user will carefully consider his/her setting and regulate use accordingly. The responsible cannabis consumer will be vigilant as to conditions -- time, place, mood, etc. -- and does not hesitate to say "no" when those conditions are not conducive to a safe, pleasant and/or productive experience.

4. Use of cannabis, to the extent that it impairs health, personal development or achievement, is abuse and should be resisted by responsible cannabis users. Abuse means harm. Some cannabis use is harmful; most is not. That which is harmful should be discouraged; that which is not need not be.

5. The responsible cannabis user does not violate the rights of others, observes accepted standards of courtesy and public propriety, and respects the preferences of those who wish to avoid cannabis entirely. Regardless of the legal status of cannabis, responsible users will adhere to emerging tobacco smoking protocols in public and private places.

However, there will always be people who do not listen.

Originally Posted by Alonely

People can also be extremely irresponsible while operating heavy machinery such as cars, saws, etc., and even with smaller objects like empty kitchen glasses. That's like "telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it." -Mark Twain

I already addressed that argument in my opening post, because everyone seems to say that whenever I post in this kind of thread when I've already explained it twenty times.

For your benefit:

Before anyone starts to criticize my post, I have indeed said that I believe intoxication is itself harmful. This does not mean I think all things that do have a risk must be eliminated, such as sharp objects, crowbars, cars, and so on. I have formed my opinion based on a formula of societal benefit versus societal harm. One person enjoying being intoxicated puts more people around him at risk every time he does so. Societal benefit = nil, only one person gets off for a bit. Societal harm - potentially great, as more responsible people could be harmed, or multiple people could be harmed by the irresponsible intoxication of one person. Please keep this simple statement, "societal benefit versus societal harm", in mind for all criticisms.

There is an ethical code to abide by.

Unfortunately ethics have no authoritative force, so we cannot rely on people being ethically persuaded. This is what the law is for.

Are there enough instances to prove that cannabis use is more dangerous than safe? Most cannabis use goes largely unreported.

Originally Posted by Lord Zero

A main point to note is that medicines generally do not have an intoxicating effect, and if they do, their purpose is not to induce a state of intoxication, unlike many of these drugs which are or should be criminalized.

Any medicine is intoxicating if in a high enough dose. Remember that many drugs that people get high off of are indeed "normal medicines" just taken in higher doses, e.g. Robitussin. Intoxicate just means "to exhilarate, confuse, or stupefy mentally or emotionally."

Originally Posted by GK: 5895/9999

I don't care about damage, I care about how it makes people act. Not to mention the amount of hotboxed rooms I've been in and the amount of buckets I've seen people take. Nearly all they talk about is when they're getting more dope. Drugs are horrible.

Marijuana makes people act horrible? I'd say well over half the people I know smoke pot, and I've never really noticed any drastic change in behavior because of it. The effects of pot on behavior are largely overblown by pop culture.

Whether or not pot is illegal has no effect on the act of smoking it. Nearly every adult you've known in the entirety of your life went through a pot phase at one point. Legalizing it would just decrease a lot of wasteful spending.