Do you favor legalizing drugs

No doubt I missed 617.2 choices, but those were the ones that made sense to me.

For the record, I favor legalizing all drugs.

And for purposes of this discussion, it is assumed drugs would be legal only for adults.

I favor recognizing that prohibition does not work and only creates artificially inflated prices and limiting competition for the criminals.

" And for purposes of this discussion, it is assumed drugs would be legal only for adults. "

How exactly would that keeps kids away from drugs ??????????????????????????

Flea's post is a HUGE reason I'm in favor, but it's a tough situation. The fact that weed is not legal blows my mind when you think of dangers vs cost of persecution and prosecution, black market and the violence within it, and loss of funds from taxation. But the thought of free-for-all meth operations kind of squashes the "legalize em all" mindframe.

One thing for sure, the current "War on Drugs" is one of the biggest follies in American history. And it rarely get's talked about.

Quote: buzzpaff

How exactly would that keeps kids away from drugs ??????????????????????????

About as well as currently kids are kept away from alcohol and tobacco. Or for that matter, as well as kids are kept away from drugs today.

Never gonna happen in a Christian country. Dream on.

Quote: Face

But the thought of free-for-all meth operations kind of squashes the "legalize em all" mind frame.

We seem to have meth operations everywhere and also have to support an army of narcotics squads who are usually the ones who benefit from it, so I don't see what is so different. Enforcement of narcotics laws is Price Support on behalf of the drug dealers. So why are you advocating that we use our taxes to keep prices artificially high so as to benefit drug dealers?

Quote: FleaStiff

We seem to have meth operations everywhere and also have to support an army of narcotics squads who are usually the ones who benefit from it, so I don't see what is so different. Enforcement of narcotics laws is Price Support on behalf of the drug dealers. So why are you advocating that we use our taxes to keep prices artificially high so as to benefit drug dealers?

Hmm. Interesting arguement. I think most of my view is kind of a risk/reward debate. I see meth as an incredibly dangerous, damaging substance, one which cannot be used casually or without almost certain severe consequences. This is only my opinion, based mostly on personal experience as an addict and not wholly backed by any sort of research. I think the cost of the Narc squad, court proceedings and incarceration would be less than the societal and medical costs of unconstricted meth use.

Weed I see as harmful, sure, but not near in scope as the means to eradicate it's use. I don't even see it as bad as cigs or alcohol, and the sheer amount of time and resources spent on it boggles the mind.

Hallucinogens, while also harmful, are (as George Carlin so aptly put) self regulating. The vast majority of users reach a point where they just stop. They almost have to, and that mirrors my own experience. I was quite a large user, then one day, I wasn't. Just like that. I'm not so sure about opening the flood gates on them, but...I dunno. See next...

Coke is also harmful, no doubt. But is the "cost" of prevention worse than the "cost" of legalization? It's surely dangerous, there have surely been lives lost or destroyed, it's surely considered one of most addictive, but where's the line? (lol pun not intended) There are some like me that used it, got into, and one day, just stopped. There are others that do it to death. How do we measure "cost"?

Crack I group with meth, just a dirty, terrible drug that has no redeeming qualities.

Opiates are tough too, because they actually have a medical use. The problem is they're the #1 hardest drug to kick, and one of the most addictive. Again, how do we measure cost of prevention vs cost to society?

These are all questions that need to be asked, IMO. Not just by us, but by the powers that be. Seriously. I'm not some fruitball stoner that just wants to smoke in peace, in fact if legalized, I probably would stay clean as I kind of like it better. But the absolutely astonishing amount of money we spend, the incredible amount of money we lose, and the total failure of any sort of progress on "prevention" NEEDS to be addressed.

How much money would YOU spend on a policy that makes your problem WORSE? Probably none. Yet we do it every time we collect a paycheck.

I might favor a small amount of decriminalization and I ABSOLLUTELY favor not allowing the cops to sieze the whole car when someone has a joint with them in it, etc.

But I have a few problems with the legalization thing. First, there is a large amount of poverty due to addictions. For proof of this look no further than all the screaming about welfare recipients being required to take drug tests to maintain benefits.

Then watch "Cops" or a similar show and see how use affects the life of the person in a negative way. You have to imagine a disproportionate share of domestic violence calls are because one or both partners are either addicts or heavy users.

After that, look around and see how many things the meth-heads have ruined for the rest of us. Want to buy Red-Devil Lye? Can't, it is long pulled from the shelves. You must sign for the good cold medicine. That is just two, surely there are more.

To think that drug use will not go up under legalizatgion is fantasy. To think if I could buy a vial of cocaine next to the cigarettes will keep illegal sellers from popping up is also not likely, though I will admit that would keep the white-collar cokeheads, there are many, from buying on the street. But that would only increased the number of crack users as dealers could buy the raw product more easily.

The saddest part is that as a group the same people who would like to ban cigarette smoking are often the same who favor legalization of drugs.

I'd say YES on most drugs.

Clearly, the current policy is ludicrous. Huge costs,
little effect.

Prohibition is viewed in hindsight as a very stupid
idea. What's any different about the War on Drugs ?

What is the purpose of restricting drugs but not
alcohol ? Both are drugs. DUI drivers kill many
many innocent bystanders. Yet I have seen
several articles in my state on repeat offenders
with more than 10 DUI convictions still out
there driving. Why haven't they been locked
up and the key tossed out ? It's Russian
Roulette !

A state Supreme Court justice got a DUI here
a few years ago.

Quote: JohnnyQ

What is the purpose of restricting drugs but not
alcohol ? Both are drugs.

There is actually a qualitative difference. As far as I know, if you take any drugs you get high. You can get high on alcohol, but there are degrees. Most people just get a pleasant buzz, not quite high you might say, while most adults can handle 1 or 2 drinks without any intoxicating effect at all.

Of course, you can also get high on glue, pain thinner and even too little oxygen. I'd like to see prohibition on that.

Quote:

DUI drivers kill many many innocent bystanders. Yet I have seen several articles in my state on repeat offenders with more than 10 DUI convictions still out there driving. Why haven't they been locked up and the key tossed out ?

That's a very good question.

Quote: AZDuffman

To think that drug use will not go up under legalizatgion is fantasy.

If heroin were legalized tomorrow, would you shoot up, AZDuffman? Of course not. Responsible Americans will not be shooting up heroin regardless of its legality.

From Forbes magazine: "Drug warriors often contend that drug use would skyrocket if we were to legalize or decriminalize drugs in the United States. Fortunately, we have a real-world example of the actual effects of ending the violent, expensive War on Drugs and replacing it with a system of treatment for problem users and addicts. Ten years ago, Portugal decriminalized all drugs. One decade after this unprecedented experiment, drug abuse is down by half..."

When Prohibition was repealed did alcohol consumption skyrocket? A couple Harvard economists determined: "We find that alcohol consumption fell sharply at the beginning of Prohibition, to approximately 30 percent of its pre-Prohibition level. During the next several years, however, alcohol consumption increased sharply, to about 60-70 percent of its pre-prohibition level. The level of consumption was virtually the same immediately after Prohibition as during the latter part of Prohibition, although consumption increased to approximately its pre-Prohibition level during the subsequent decade."

Quote: AZDuffman

To think if I could buy a vial of cocaine next to the cigarettes will keep illegal sellers from popping up is also not likely...

If coke was legal and I was already a junkie, I'd go for the 100% pure pharmeceutical-grade stuff at the drug store, I wouldn't be buying from the shady guy in the alley who might be cutting his product with impurities.

Quote: reno

From Forbes magazine: "Drug warriors often contend that drug use would skyrocket if we were to legalize or decriminalize drugs in the United States. Fortunately, we have a real-world example of the actual effects of ending the violent, expensive War on Drugs and replacing it with a system of treatment for problem users and addicts. Ten years ago, Portugal decriminalized all drugs. One decade after this unprecedented experiment, drug abuse is down by half..."

I'd be curious to know how it impacted organized crime, though they didn't mention it there. Although I'm sure criminals find a different venue to work lacking drug traffic, addicts are a sure source of constant funds.

Quote: Nareed

There is actually a qualitative difference. As far as I know, if you take any drugs you get high. You can get high on alcohol, but there are degrees. Most people just get a pleasant buzz, not quite high you might say, while most adults can handle 1 or 2 drinks without any intoxicating effect at all.

They work the same. You can take a puff or a bump and have a very minor, yet noticable, effect. You can still problems solve, do work, follow a story, compose yourself, just like having one beer. You could smoke a joint or do a line and get silly, same as you could drink a six pack and get silly. Or you could do the whole bag in a sitting same as you could drink a fifth in one sitting and get schnockered. Hallucinogens are more of an "all or nothing" experience, but most others are no different than alcohol.

Quote: reno

If heroin were legalized tomorrow, would you shoot up, AZDuffman? Of course not. Responsible Americans will not be shooting up heroin regardless of its legality.

If coke was legal and I was already a junkie, I'd go for the 100% pure pharmeceutical-grade stuff at the drug store, I wouldn't be buying from the shady guy in the alley who might be cutting his product with impurities.

Good points. Just look to tobacco and alcohol for examples. Both are legal, yet not everyone does it. And while a select few brew their own, you don't have a massive underground operation that sells possibly poisonous swill at 40x's market value, and a multi-billion dollar inept operation trying to stop it.

Quote: rxwine

I'd be curious to know how it impacted organized crime, though they didn't mention it there. Although I'm sure criminals find a different venue to work lacking drug traffic, addicts are a sure source of constant funds.

In the drug section of organized crime, I don't see how it couldn't improve. Money is the only way this works. Let's use weed as our example. The actual cost to make one plant is beyond minimal. If you grow a veggie garden from seed, you already have all the skills necessary. Corn is amazingly more difficult to grow than weed, and even corn's not that hard. Plant seed, water, wait, water, wait, water, harvest. The cost is cents. The worth, at least in street value, is hundreds if not thousands of dollars, depending on quality and size, and that's just ONE plant.

A green pepper plant, in weight of usable product, is comparable to that of weed. How much is a few green peppers at the local farmers market? $2? $4? So due to it's illegal status, weed is 500x's more expensive. Legalize it, put it into the hands of farmers, the private sector, and tax the bejeezuz out of it, and you have a new "industry", a new tax revenue, and could still do it at a fraction of the cost of the current blackmarket rate. Weed is no longer worth it to the kingpins to go to all the trouble of growing, harvesting, shipping and distributing. So not only don't you have a Narc army to support, you have less police work in cathcing mules crossing the border, or the violence the drug cartels create.

I honestly can not think of, nor have I been suggested to, any single reason why legalization would be worse than "America's War on America".

Quote: reno

If heroin were legalized tomorrow, would you shoot up, AZDuffman? Of course not. Responsible Americans will not be shooting up heroin regardless of its legality.

Would I? Nope, espically not heroin. But I would bet lots of people would snort cocaine.

Quote:

If coke was legal and I was already a junkie, I'd go for the 100% pure pharmeceutical-grade stuff at the drug store, I wouldn't be buying from the shady guy in the alley who might be cutting his product with impurities.

You are a logical person. If the street guy is selling it for half the price the junkies will still be buying. Illegal cigarettes sell well.

Quote: pacomartin

The public desire to legalize marijuana has been growing weaker over the decades. The time has come and gone.

Paco wrote this in an old thread from 2010, so maybe he's changed his mind since then. Based upon this graph released by Gallup today, it's only a matter of time before pot is legal:

Quote: buzzpaff

" And for purposes of this discussion, it is assumed drugs would be legal only for adults. "

How exactly would that keeps kids away from drugs ??????????????????????????

Amazingly enough, better than 50% (I think around 53% or so) of all Americans feel that marijuana should be as legal as alcohol and treated the same. Politicians don't go with what the people want; they do whatever the hell they please purporting themselves as acting "in the public's best interest", when in fact they are looking at their own agendas and nothing more. Both parties act in unison and are in agreement for different reasons! Republicans think that something is immoral and some sort of sin against Jesus or something... and Democrats feel that people are just too stupid to think for themselves so we have to do it FOR them!

Let's talk about the stigma and bottom lines of it all. Nancy Reagan "Just say no" (and saying this as her secret service agents and doctors are seeing to her various prescription drugs). Honestly, marijuana is less harmful than alcohol but was conveniently added into the "War on drugs". The really stupid thing (that has been pointed out) is how with marijuana NOT being illegal and on the black market, your teenage child would play holy hell in obtaining it and have it about impossible as it is for them to obtain a six-pack of beer... currently they can EASILY obtain marijuana much more easily than they can get their evil little mitts on a six-pack of beer. Why is this? Because alcohol is closely regulated, taxed to high heaven and the laws are stringent on sale to minors. It is just not feasible or profitable for alcohol to be on the black market to any extent.

If you were to legalize marijuana and treat it just the same as alcohol:

- You would ELIMINATE the black market and it would no longer be profitable or feasible for a criminal element to be making money on it.

- The taxes you would collect are OFF THE CHART! It would take a huge chunk out of that national debt instead of adding to it with "The war on drugs".

- You would piss off America's youth, since THEN the damn stuff is just as hard to get your hands on as that six-pack of beer if you are a minor!

- Prisons are big business in America, eating up taxpayer dollars but there are those that turn a nice buck out of our prison system with the privatization that has occurred in recent years. Simple marijuana possession gets you a stay in prison and will obviously be detracting from you being a normal productive working enterprising individual--- Go ask Tommy Chong! hahaha You would eliminate a percentage of our prison population that if not for being incarcerated for having the evil marijuana, would be working, tax-paying productive people.


Now let's look at this from a little DIFFERENT point of view:

- We, the government have spent HUGE money on this "War on drugs" and because we can't admit to making a mistake after this much time, hype, money and effort has gone into this (marijuana) portion of the project, there is NO WAY we can stop now! We won't let you down, Nancy... you dizzy b*tch---"Just Say No"!

- We, the pharmaceutical companies HATE marijuana! We want it as illegal as it can get because marijuana use apparently eliminates a portion of our own legal dope that we are pushing on TV commercials each and every day and what REALLY pisses us off is that there are no side effects like when you take our product that induces nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, cramps, etc., etc.! What if this costs us money damnit!!!???? Oh well, it's a good thing we have the politicians in our back pockets with our lobbyists so legal marijuana will never happen if WE can help it!

Substance use and abuse is common in our society and I believe in allowing people to think for themselves and use common sense. Drug abuse is OKAY in our society, as long as you are buying it from a government condoned drug dealer, such as Pfizer or Merck! Legalize it, tax it and administer laws that treat marijuana just the same as tobacco and alcohol and BE DONE WITH IT!

Quote: IvanYerkanoff

If you were to legalize marijuana and treat it just the same as alcohol:

- The taxes you would collect are OFF THE CHART! It would take a huge chunk out of that national debt instead of adding to it with "The war on drugs".

That is, until somebody figures out that you can grow marijuana in your own backyard, and it's pretty much impossible for anybody to tax it without using the same "brute force" tactics they use now, except that instead of arresting somebody for growing it, they would demand to see the tax certificates. Also, what happens when somebody figures out that you probably can't tax the stuff grown on tribal (i.e. "Indian") lands, any more than you can tax their cigarettes?

Quote:

You would piss off America's youth, since THEN the damn stuff is just as hard to get your hands on as that six-pack of beer if you are a minor!

Again, not if they grow it themselves - and what crime would they be committing when they do?

Personally, I think cannabis should be treated the same as, say, Vicodin - something available via prescription. (Speaking of Vicodin, if you don't make every drug legal without a prescription, what good would that do, since there will still be a black market for whatever is illegal?)

Crime?

You make it a crime, quadruple the sentence for home-growing, impose a minimum 10K fine.

The Government could be the sole distributor thereby collecting the revenues and the tax dollars.

If you had the power to ensure ridiculous levels of revenue by making competition with you as illegal (and costly) as Hell, why wouldn't you?

Quote: IvanYerkanoff

Amazingly enough, better than 50% (I think around 53% or so) of all Americans feel that marijuana should be as legal as alcohol and treated the same. Politicians don't go with what the people want; they do whatever the hell they please purporting themselves as acting "in the public's best interest", when in fact they are looking at their own agendas and nothing more. Both parties act in unison and are in agreement for different reasons! Republicans think that something is immoral and some sort of sin against Jesus or something... and Democrats feel that people are just too stupid to think for themselves so we have to do it FOR them!

Where this line of reasoning breaks down is that most of those 53% aren't especially likely to change their vote based on a candidate's marijuana policy, whereas the other 47% would react as if they'd endorsed zoophilia. So yeah, they're just being politicians, not ideologues.

Quote: EvenBob

Never gonna happen in a Christian country. Dream on.

Drugs were legal in this country for a longer period of time than they have been illegal.

And it was a secular country longer than it's been a Christian one.

If you think drug use is a victimless crime, you are a MORON !

Quote: buzzpaff

If you think drug use is a victimless crime, you are a MORON !

Buzz- because some activity may have 'victims' is not necessarily a reason to make it a crime. If we outlawed cars there would be TENS OF THOUSANDS fewer deaths every year in our country. Same can be said for alcohol. And cigarettes. How about diving boards in swimming pools? How about fireworks? Need I mention guns?

Drugs, like the above examples, requires INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY. If someone using drugs drives a car, treat him the same as the person driving a car under the influence of alcohol. If someone using drugs commits an assault, there are laws to punish that person, just like the person who commits an assault sober.

If drug use and production was legal in Mexico, how many fewer beheadings would there be? Some argue that keeping drugs illegal LEADS to crime.

Many drugs are legal with a prescription. many post-op drugs are not, crack is not legal, pot has been "decriminalized". So I guess the OP is about legalizing cocaine and crack. Analogs of cocaine are legal with a prescription. No I don't think smokin crack should be legal. Thats the bottom line of the OP... really quite an uninformed Question.

Quote: SOOPOO

Buzz- because some activity may have 'victims' is not necessarily a reason to make it a crime. If we outlawed cars there would be TENS OF THOUSANDS fewer deaths every year in our country. Same can be said for alcohol. And cigarettes. How about diving boards in swimming pools? How about fireworks? Need I mention guns?

Drugs, like the above examples, requires INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY. If someone using drugs drives a car, treat him the same as the person driving a car under the influence of alcohol. If someone using drugs commits an assault, there are laws to punish that person, just like the person who commits an assault sober.

If drug use and production was legal in Mexico, how many fewer beheadings would there be? Some argue that keeping drugs illegal LEADS to crime.

Didn't you know that using logic in a debate about drug prohibition isn't allowed?

A "legitimate" argument in this type of debate is "you're an idiot if you believe that." At least, that seems more sense to people than actually taking a second to look at facts (like statistics on drug use and danger in countries that have legalized drugs) or philosophy (like that IMO, locking people up or punishing them them through law for drug use is morally disgusting)

Which one of those items mentioned have addictive qualities SOOPOO? Alcohol and Nicotine yes. Caffein yes. Guns, cars, fireworks no.
Drugs by your appararent definnition have an addictive quality that causes repeated usage, else a withdrawl stage ensues. Great business model.
So the dispensary (Pharmacy, drug-dealer, etc) is in control of the person. The person has lost control, and might do anything to get the drug.
Wide-spread availibility is the answer? So how does an improverished drug-user get more drug without financial rescource?
Geez, I guess we have to legalize other things to make sure these impoverished drug-users don't turn criminal.
I'll even go as far to say that the moral domino effect occurs, and that justice served is not favored when dispensed by Legal authority, but rather by gang justice.

Society will spend dollars to imprison drug users and pennies for rehabilitation.

Am I the only one who has a problem with that ?

Quote: buzzpaff

If you think drug use is a victimless crime, you are a MORON !

Haven't we all also heard the argument that "We shouldn't allow any CASINOS
here because it will ruin an addictive gambler's life" ?

I am just saying that the ldrug aws / enforcement that are currently in effect are what is
RUINING ( and actually ENDING ) many lives. It is time to take a good hard LOGICAL
look at things. Certainly the horrific crimes committed in Mexico are due to the
huge demand for illegal drugs up here.

Quote: buzzpaff

If you think drug use is a victimless crime, you are a MORON !

If a guy grows marijuana in his backyard and smokes it in his own home, it's definitely a crime. But I can't figure out who the victim is.

Maybe the shareholders of Anheiser-Busch are the victims because they didn't get his money?

Quote: reno

If a guy grows marijuana in his backyard and smokes it in his own home, it's definitely a crime. But I can't figure out who the victim is.

Maybe the shareholders of Anheiser-Busch are the victims because they didn't get his money?

So then.... what natural laws did he break to warrant it being a crime? None!

So it's really a crime that the government would imprison people for personal behavior that doesn't directly harm any other person.

Lets see... what are the CONSEQUENCES of smoking MJ? Impaired thought-processes (if NOT you AINT stoned !), Risk of injury/Death to others (you don't count doper, you can't be a victim to yourself after all you can grow it and smoke it WITHOUT being a victim), impovrishment due to lack of employment, (it may be legal, but a Co. can consider you unfit to work for such Co.), and lowering of your base-line health (its those damn munchies, and the clogging of the lungs from the smoke). Just a few thoughts to consider.

" Just a few thoughts to consider. "


You have convinced me. We definitely need to outlaw alcohol and tobacco immediately !

Well, I just think that adding more stuff to the legal list for common usage like MJ, cocaine, heroin, etc. probably isn't in everyones best interest.
Nonetheless, I do agree MJ should be legal, priced at US$50/oz, with a $50/oz tax applied. Hemp (sativa strain) used to make the best lasso West of the St. John's River.

"Drugs let you expand your mind"
So does physical fitness and a good education. But then, like always in Human History... its social education (Intellectual Welfare) vs. intelligence education.

Quote: JohnnyQ

I'd say YES on most drugs.

Clearly, the current policy is ludicrous. Huge costs, little effect.

Disagree completely. There has been plenty of effect.

Militarization of local law enforcement.
Kick doors down, shoot people and dogs, sometimes at the wrong address, and ask questions later.
4th amendment gutted (I smell marijuana so I'll just take a look in your trunk).
5th amendment gutted (property forfeiture. burden's on you to get it back. good luck with that, bro.)

What's missing is any benefit to American society.

Quote: 98Clubs

Nonetheless, I do agree MJ should be legal, priced at US$50/oz, with a $50/oz tax applied.

Why does every discussion of marijuana freedom come down to taxing it? Because the government does such a wonderful job with the tax dollars it already collects it should be rewarded with even more? God help us if we eliminate a failed government prohibition without creating a government bureaucracy in its wake.

If you listen to the drug warriors, marijuana is already a burden on society.

By a show of hands, who does not smoke pot now and would smoke enough to become a burden on society if it were made legal tomorrow?

Quote: 98Clubs

Lets see... what are the CONSEQUENCES of smoking MJ? Impaired thought-processes (if NOT you AINT stoned !), Risk of injury/Death to others (you don't count doper, you can't be a victim to yourself after all you can grow it and smoke it WITHOUT being a victim), impovrishment due to lack of employment, (it may be legal, but a Co. can consider you unfit to work for such Co.), and lowering of your base-line health (its those damn munchies, and the clogging of the lungs from the smoke). Just a few thoughts to consider.

The point is that the consequences of drug use are not a illegitimate matter of federal concern. States and local government can be inclined to regulate drugs, I'd rather they don't regulate much.

And I agree with the sentiment that drugs should not be legalized just so that they can be taxed. We should strive to eliminate taxes in general and lower spending - rather than produce new revenues to uselessly try to keep up with spending increases.

" If a guy grows marijuana in his backyard and smokes it in his own home, it's definitely a crime. But I can't figure out who the victim is. "

Can you figure out the crime when a meth lab blows up and innocent kids are killed ?

Quote: QuadDeuces

Why does every discussion of marijuana freedom come down to taxing it? Because the government does such a wonderful job with the tax dollars it already collects it should be rewarded with even more? God help us if we eliminate a failed government prohibition without creating a government bureaucracy in its wake.

It's okay Quad, he does not like marijuana users so it is okay to punitively tax them.

Quote: Buzzard

" If a guy grows marijuana in his backyard and smokes it in his own home, it's definitely a crime. But I can't figure out who the victim is. "

Can you figure out the crime when a meth lab blows up and innocent kids are killed ?

Well I figure when you blow anything up and innocent people are killed then those innocent people are the victims. The fact that, in your hypothetical, it was a meth lab really isn't relevant to me. Would it be any different if someone blows up say.... IDK... a car and kills someone?

What about a drunk guy who decides to get start a fight? Obviously their behavior - starting a fight - should be illegal. Although I won't make the argument that being drunk should also be illegal. I think that same logic is applicable to marijuana, meth, and indeed all drugs.

Quote: Buzzard

" If a guy grows marijuana in his backyard and smokes it in his own home, it's definitely a crime. But I can't figure out who the victim is. "

Can you figure out the crime when a meth lab blows up and innocent kids are killed ?

It meth wasn't illicit it wouldn't be cooked in neighborhoods next to elementary schools but in industrial districts with proper safety controls.

You really want to continue this nonsense? Prohibition kills innocent kids!

In fact, I'd wager that those who choose meth wouldn't if the other, more organic compounds weren't so hard to come by.

Perish the thought that the $$$ and the addiction aren't the REAL reason... legal or not.

" In fact, I'd wager that those who choose meth wouldn't if the other, more organic compounds weren't so hard to come by. "

I won't wager on people's misery, but check out your average meth users. Crack, booze, and coke are more readily available
and often cheaper than meth. Most meth shops are in it for the money ! If you think legalizing it will stop labs, you are sadly mistaken !

Those asholes will cook it anywhere at all. It's all about the money.

You just don't get it. There's nothing special about meth. The "money" they can command is because it's illegal. The only other reason is because it's scarce. The only reason it's scarce is because it's illegal. Same with herb and coca.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1067361-marijuana-may-be-the-next-big-growth-sector-in-the-u-s-stock-market

I am not in favor of legalizing, aka legitimizing, any illegal drugs, and that includes pot for the potheads out there. There's definitely a reason responsible corporations and other companies in this country will not hire potheads or anyone else testing positive for drugs. Just think of the quality of workers we have at places like,Boeing, then look at the useless tools who drive delivery trucks, claim they're "artists", those who do dishes in restaurants etc., and the unemployed,

There's statistics that show how the fools who smoke pot die regularly from any of a number of toxins delivered by the drug, and even more go on to look for bigger thrills with stronger drugs. It's a waste of time and a waste of life. People who need to live with drugs have compounded life problems in the social are also, like "alternative" lifestyles that cause conflicts with their sexual orientation, financial problems because few,respectable companies would ever hire them, and many of them flat out end up rotting away in prisons where I personally want them.

Get a life. Get off drugs.

Wow. Sounding so high and mighty, but the spelling just doesn't match what the tone implies.

Seems to be personal - what happened, did a hippie steal your crush in high school?

That would be nice if "they" legalized drugs. As it stands now drugs are impossible to get unless of course your in jail.

All I'm sure of is that the gov't "War on Drugs" run through the last 25 or 30 years has been an absolute nightmare and turned into probably the most tragic social experiment this country has seen since slavery was legal. The monetary cost is infinite, and the cost of the destruction of untold millions of our own citizens lives is surely a HUGE stain that society will never be able to undo. And for what? Street drugs are more plentiful than EVER, and the money is so HUGE and EASY, that we've become an example to the rest of the world how a country SHOULD NOT react to the illicit drug industry.

Quote: QuadDeuces

You just don't get it. There's nothing special about meth. The "money" they can command is because it's illegal. The only other reason is because it's scarce. The only reason it's scarce is because it's illegal. Same with herb and coca.

Meth... nothing special??? Like the most intense high outside of sex? Highly addictive, therefore. And cocaine is the only drug known that a person habitually uses until death. All the others involve withdrawl. Weed is milquetoast by comparison, but like written many years ago... its a gateway to other more harmful drugs... primarily in that the person selling MJ also sells the more dangerous stuff. So naturally the CEO/drug-dealer psychology states to legalize them all... I want the money, you get the drug. As mentioned earlier, growing/smoking on'es own MJ is perhaps the limit of legalization anytime soon. I am in favor of that: meth, crack, cocaine, heroin, abolutely not. Next thing ya know, oxycontin has to be made legal w/o a perscription. Go ahead, conquer the world selling drugs... there's too mny people to feed now, whats a billion or two fewer?