What would happen if drugs were legalized tomorrow?

[Higher-Jin]

This isn't a thread for debate on whether or not they should be. I am merely putting forth a hypothetical question. It occured to me after reading this article:

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSN0227006420080602?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews&rpc=22&sp=true

About mexican drug cartels murdering mayors and federal agents. I think the drug cartels would lose a lot of power if drugs were legalized, but would society suffer as a result?

Here are the two scenarios I'm thinking about:

1) Light drugs, such as weed, ecstacy, and mild hallucinagens are legalized.

2) All drugs, including heavy stuff like heroin, are legalized.

What do you guys think would happen?

[Spirit Juice]

Similar to what happens to all the black people in Chapelle's skit when they all get reprimands from the government... but instead of money they get drugs. :V

[angryliberal]

your question inherently requires discussion of whther they should and why you eblieve those laws should eb in oplace as opposed to the current laws. overall, this is going to eventually becomes "drugsz are teh win" vs "i don't need drugs to have teh good times."

now my opinion, ALL drug laws need to be reformed. you cannot dictate morality to people, and the only thing making drugs illegal has done is create an insanely violent black market and a social stigma that will not allow for progressive thinking on the topic.

[fishjie]

the same thing that happened after prohibition was repealed

[DarthTrey]

the same thing that happened after prohibition was repealed

your question inherently requires discussion of whther they should and why you eblieve those laws should eb in oplace as opposed to the current laws. overall, this is going to eventually becomes "drugsz are teh win" vs "i don't need drugs to have teh good times."

now my opinion, ALL drug laws need to be reformed. you cannot dictate morality to people, and the only thing making drugs illegal has done is create an insanely violent black market and a social stigma that will not allow for progressive thinking on the topic.



what they said.

Honestly I don't think it would affect much. People that want to use drugs will always find a way. One thing is for sure though. The jails would be a lot less busy with petty criminals allowing Police to actually work on shit that matters.

[fishjie]

here's the thing. if meth were legalized tomorrow, i wouldn't go out and buy it. the majority of people who don't do drugs, would not start doing them it they were legal. they abstain for various reasons, and those reasons will still remain after its legal. just like how people still do drugs, even though they are illegal.

[jae hoon]

Being relevant to the topic I can finally post this,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HD6B94RURA&feature=related

IMO it would drastically decrease alot of the crime and it would decrease the amount of people in prisons for doing shit like smoking a joint.

[Rooks4]

1) Light drugs, such as weed, ecstacy, and mild hallucinagens are legalized.



How exactly do you classify Ecstacy as a light drug? You realize every pill in existance contains some sort of Heroin or cocaine right? And the different combinations of the two give each it's unique 'effect.' Sometimes they add mescaline too... those are trippy ;)

I havn't touched the shit in years, my job won't allow it and i was never really into it.. Just don't agree that I'd classify it as light.. People OD on them all the time (or did when I was in HS 10 years ago.) Maybe they've gone weaksauce since the 90s.

As for what would happen? Our country would be out of debt pretty quick. Think of the billions of dollars that we'd save on the "war on drugs" and the additional tax income that the Government would get. It'd be insane.

Of course having a gajillion people smoking weed all over the country would probably make the overall average IQ plummet. Not to stereotype ALL weed smokers, but there seems to be a trend that heavy pot smokers are dumb as rocks. I've got friends that partake who are super smart, but they got smart without doing heavy heavy toking.

[Demon Dash]

Dealers would be having a field day...

[DarthTrey]

Of course having a gajillion people smoking weed all over the country would probably make the overall average IQ plummet. Not to stereotype ALL weed smokers, but there seems to be a trend that heavy pot smokers are dumb as rocks. I've got friends that partake who are super smart, but they got smart without doing heavy heavy toking.

Well of course smoking doesn't make you smarter, neither does Alcohol or any other substance.

While smoking can lead to a decline those losers will naturally fall along the wayside along with the current Red neck Alcoholics.

[valaris]

First thing that would happen if it was legalized, Government would tax the living hell out of it.

[moyospeed]

If they did it would be better so I wouldn't have to go on a goose chase to get some.

[FistsofFury]

The alcohol/tobacco giants would immediately pounce on it business wise. Have that shit on lock. The Police would complain about less funding.

But most people would be a little happier!

[ringopan]

coca cola with real coke again... i think that was just a rumor though.

also new "marlboro highs", to go along with their standard cigs.

[Alex]

IM asuming there would be some kind of 18 and up law to it.. But i thnk Alot of irresponsible people would die. Like way more then people die now of alchaol poisning. I wouldnt mind.

[DGiTaL aSSaSSin]

The government would make alot of money from the heavy tax that would be put on all legalized drugs...

You know the government would only legalized drugs if they somehow could make money off of it.

[Gumbercules]

i would give it to children and currupt the youth of america

[Corner-Trap]

Our economy will finally be stable.

[Penance]

all i can say is what would happen in my life. i'd buy at least a QP and smoke it all in front of the local police station. the go for a job at wal-mart and be like "fuck yo piss test!" afterwards i'd start growing and selling.

[Bowza]

A lot less people will be in jail, police and fbi resources will be more devoted towards handling murder, theft, rape, and other coercive acts, no more taxpayer money wasted on the war on drugs, gangs would have to find other means of funding(extortion/robbery, which is much more difficult to do without getting caught than the drug game, especially since more police units will be freed up to go after those kinds of things), and more freedom for every citizen in this country to do whatever they want with their own lives.

[Okazaki III]

[/caste=wallotext lvl 3]

How exactly do you classify Ecstacy as a light drug? You realize every pill in existance contains some sort of Heroin or cocaine right?

Nonsense. You talk about ecstacy then you talk about MDMA as actual compound. The fact that you got flaky pills from dealers doesn't mean "every xtc pill in existance" contains heroin or coke. This is ludicrous.


I havn't touched the shit in years, my job won't allow it and i was never really into it.. Just don't agree that I'd classify it as light.. People OD on them all the time (or did when I was in HS 10 years ago.) Maybe they've gone weaksauce since the 90s.

OK, so you were never into it - but you know enough about it already to classify it as a "heavy" drug, because people "OD-ed on them all the time". This is still MDMA you're talking about yeah? Look up some statistics on how many OD cases there are in your area and compare which ones of them fall into coke, heroin or mdma. Furthermore, OD cases for habitual drug users is far lower compared to that of meth or heroin junkies. In terms of symptoms suppression and damage limitation your chances of survival are much higher if you OD on MDMA rather than heroin/coke.


As for what would happen? Our country would be out of debt pretty quick. Think of the billions of dollars that we'd save on the "war on drugs" and the additional tax income that the Government would get. It'd be insane.

And spend the gains in new therapies & healthcare research for people who decide to dabble in heroin, crack or meth - due to their addictive capabilities?

Of course having a gajillion people smoking weed all over the country would probably make the overall average IQ plummet. Not to stereotype ALL weed smokers, but there seems to be a trend that heavy pot smokers are dumb as rocks. I've got friends that partake who are super smart, but they got smart without doing heavy heavy toking.

Newsflash: A gajilion people all over the country already smoke weed, you just don't know about it. This ranges from people that smoke once a year for old times sake down to people that smoke every day. From royalty to straight ghetto. Every.single.layer in society. Making it legal just increases the visibility for the supplying organisation (notice that I don't say THE government since private companies would want a piece of the pie too).

lol at "All heavy smokers are dumb as rock but i've got friends that partake and got supersmart because of non heavy toking". How fucking stupid is this shit? This is as ignorant as saying "I hate fucking black people because of abc but I'm not a racist because I got a black friend too." GTFO with that shit. Just because YOUR heavy toking friends/associates are dumb as fuck doesn't imply that every other heavy smoker is. Look at you for example, you claim to abstain and you still managed to write down some incredibly dumb shit. Let alone how stupid you would be if you'd smoke.

Every mood altering substance has this effect. You try memorizing something when you're on alcohol, mdma, coke, heroin, weed - it don't matter because you won't be able to learn for shit anyway for the duration that the compound is in your system. This is a perfect example of miseducation recycled by someone who's too stupid to do to their homework on the drugs subject.

I'm hoping your post is just bait because it dumbs this thread down - turning it into yet another bullshit drugs thread on SRK.

As for me, I don't think the world is ready yet for full scale legalisation of everything. Perhaps begin slowly and do weed only, because you could argue that it can be consumed without further processing or modification. But even that is going to be a very slow and painful process. You'll have too many stake holders trying to get a piece of the pie, ranging from government to companies like Pfizer and Walmart. Not to mention the logistics/operational side of things - in the cross over phase from illegal to legal you'll get criminal gangs targeting the storage of the drugs and other criminal behaviour. But I don't think these are the real problems. The real problem is how to change people perception and the attitude towards drugs - whilst providing unbiased information about their respective effects.

[monbaby]

marijuanaism would be a disease...

[Higher-Jin]

all i can say is what would happen in my life. i'd buy at least a QP and smoke it all in front of the local police station. the go for a job at wal-mart and be like "fuck yo piss test!" afterwards i'd start growing and selling.

Seems to me like very few people would buy home grown weed. The kind manufactured by big business would likely be cheaper and higher quality.

I actually don't do drugs and I greatly dislike drugs. Still, I dislike organized crime syndicates more. In poor countries like Mexico, the drug cartels have more money and better firepower then the police. Why? Because they are funded by the purchases of recreational drug users.

Their deep pockets allow them to corrupt the governments of poor countries far too easily. If you ask me legalized drugs are merely the lesser of the two evils. I'd rather live in a world where people have access to drugs than a world where brutal mob violence claims the lives of honest public servants and law enforcement officers.

[Shungokustasu]

Not a damn thing. Most Americans are on drugs now. Hell, I'm fucked up now...

[BEWD]

the same thing that happened after prohibition was repealed

This^.

Also a thanks to the person who posted the bullshit vid

[Zero]

Dealers would be having a field day...

Oh, no. Quite the opposite.

Due to:

1) the increased direct competition with other drugs now that they are in the same market
2) the costs associated with the shipping, storage, and distribution of the drug would be much less since the work needed to avoid law enforcement would be gone.
3) Increased supply due to unhindered importation and, most significantly, a new source of supply: our own backyard.

The now-legal drugs would be much, much cheaper. In fact, drugs like marijuana and cocaine could cost as much as lettuce and sugar, respectively. Granted that the government doesn't pass some sort of sin tax on them (which they almost certainly would).

The point is, this low price would drive the dealers right out of the market.

So trust me, our career drug dealers do not want legalized drugs.

[Penance]

Seems to me like very few people would buy home grown weed. The kind manufactured by big business would likely be cheaper and higher quality.



i disagree on all aspects. home grown is usualy of a much higher quality as it's grown under controlled conditions. as for big companies selling it for cheaper and higher quality. i doubt that. they would have to tax it, keep their prices comparable to street dealers and home growers. as for quality, growing marijuana is much diffrent than growing tobacco. i highly doubt an evil corporation being able to produce cannibus cup quality buds all the time.

[Phoenix Wright]

The Private Prison industry will dissapear.

[epp1e]

Then I'd invite all you Socalyukeners over to my place.

[Rhio2k]

Caucasian teens would go fuckin' nuts, and auto accidents would go up 9,000% in scenario 2. In scenario 1...the accident rate wouldn't be so high.

[Alzarath]

Marvel would take over the US.

[angryliberal]

i disagree on all aspects. home grown is usualy of a much higher quality as it's grown under controlled conditions. as for big companies selling it for cheaper and higher quality. i doubt that. they would have to tax it, keep their prices comparable to street dealers and home growers. as for quality, growing marijuana is much diffrent than growing tobacco. i highly doubt an evil corporation being able to produce cannibus cup quality buds all the time.


i disagree with this on all points. look at teh booze market, specifically beer. yes, there is shit beer and there is nice, high quality beer. higher quality beer than 99.9% of society could ever produce in their own home. the same is true for bud, corporation would have the fund to have entire teams of botanists on staff working on the newest breakthroughs in cross breeding, allowing them to control the amount of thc produced by the plants, and also to control the type and length of the high in the average person.

while we (the private growers) may be devoted to the craft, most of us won't have the abilities or resources to achieve what big business could. now, we would be able to provide for ourselves and even create our own strains, expecially given the amount of resources that will be available due to legality, but big business will be producing new strains at a rate much higher than your normal backyard cultivator.

[Serpent]

The recession would possibly dissappear overnight, as without the huge financial drain the "war against drugs" imposes, taxes would be cut tremendously and the economy, theoretically, would be re-invigorated. It isn't the upper class that pay for the government, it is the middle and upper middle.

On the other hand, with no war against drugs, you'd lose a huge amount of worthless jobs that are funded by bullying around minorities. It would be like if you cut the HR departments around the country as well. Nobody would miss a step in terms of actual productivity or contribution to society, but you'd have a ton of people without jobs that relied on those useless positions. Same idea with education actually, but generally education at least produces something arguably.

Drug enforcement and schooling would not exist to the extent it does now if the population was significantly lower. Throughout history, population was controlled through wars, disease, or famine. We don't really have any of that now. We can only rely on feminist women to lower the population by refusing to have babies, and aborting them when they do have sex with men.

[lamewadd]

The recession would possibly dissappear overnight, as without the huge financial drain the "war against drugs" imposes, taxes would be cut tremendously and the economy, theoretically, would be re-invigorated. It isn't the upper class that pay for the government, it is the middle and upper middle.

On the other hand, with no war against drugs, you'd lose a huge amount of worthless jobs that are funded by bullying around minorities. It would be like if you cut the HR departments around the country as well. Nobody would miss a step in terms of actual productivity or contribution to society, but you'd have a ton of people without jobs that relied on those useless positions. Same idea with education actually, but generally education at least produces something arguably.

Drug enforcement and schooling would not exist to the extent it does now if the population was significantly lower. Throughout history, population was controlled through wars, disease, or famine. We don't really have any of that now. We can only rely on feminist women to lower the population by refusing to have babies, and aborting them when they do have sex with men.

Uhh...no.

The government would tax the fuck out of all the drugs and all that means is that drug dealers would be selling their shit for cheap.

The same problems would persist. It's just that you'd have kids dying in the street for less money. And the War on Drugs would suddenly become "The War to Make You Fucking Pay Your Taxes."

[Jimmy Bones]

*reads thread title*

Apocalypse?

[angryliberal]

Uhh...no.

The government would tax the fuck out of all the drugs and all that means is that drug dealers would be selling their shit for cheap.

The same problems would persist. It's just that you'd have kids dying in the street for less money. And the War on Drugs would suddenly become "The War to Make You Fucking Pay Your Taxes."

ummm...no, NO ONE would take chances buying an unregulated substance that could contain anything when they can buy regulated by a governing board the same way booze is handled.

you don't understand the war on drugs at all. stop talking for your own good.

[Penance]

i disagree with this on all points. look at teh booze market, specifically beer. yes, there is shit beer and there is nice, high quality beer. higher quality beer than 99.9% of society could ever produce in their own home. the same is true for bud, corporation would have the fund to have entire teams of botanists on staff working on the newest breakthroughs in cross breeding, allowing them to control the amount of thc produced by the plants, and also to control the type and length of the high in the average person.

while we (the private growers) may be devoted to the craft, most of us won't have the abilities or resources to achieve what big business could. now, we would be able to provide for ourselves and even create our own strains, expecially given the amount of resources that will be available due to legality, but big business will be producing new strains at a rate much higher than your normal backyard cultivator.

so be it. anytime a new marijuana companty is formed, we kill all it's investors and burn the building to the ground. gurilla growers using gurilla tatics.

[angryliberal]

so be it. anytime a new marijuana companty is formed, we kill all it's investors and burn the building to the ground. gurilla growers using gurilla tatics.

or, you could just grow at home, and...you know...ignore big business pot...you know..."sold out" pot...corporate pot...those bastards...

[TS]

Caucasian teens would go fuckin' nuts, and auto accidents would go up 9,000% in scenario 2.
I like that for whatever reason you specified caucasian kids.

:rofl:

[Serpent]

ummm...no, NO ONE would take chances buying an unregulated substance that could contain anything when they can buy regulated by a governing board the same way booze is handled.

you don't understand the war on drugs at all. stop talking for your own good.

Stupid people like him can't help themselves. They are so busy trying to look smart on an internet message board that they can't stop to look at what they write.

[ElderGOD]

What do you guys think would happen?

Aren't drugs legal already?

How much more "legal" can they get?

[Penance]

or, you could just grow at home, and...you know...ignore big business pot...you know..."sold out" pot...corporate pot...those bastards...

aww, but i want to kill people.

[Spirit Juice]

aww, but i want to kill people.

You don't need drugs to kill people. :D

[TS]

It helps.

[Fenrir171]

http://media.buzzhumor.com/7/Cannabis_legalized_in_New_York7f196f.jpg

[felineki]

The prison population would plummet. Rather than being thrown into a violent environment that breeds criminal behavior, many, many people would have a chance to have normal, productive lives.

[lamewadd]

ummm...no, NO ONE would take chances buying an unregulated substance that could contain anything when they can buy regulated by a governing board the same way booze is handled.

you don't understand the war on drugs at all. stop talking for your own good.

:tdown:

Terrible post.

If heroin was legalized, how much do you think the government would tax on it? And how quick do you think somebody would plow through a 40k/year salary on it? I can confidently say it would be quick enough to notice that you could get it much cheaper from the guy behind the Home Depot, rather than spending 8 bucks per hit. You could make a (weak) case that it would be different for pot, but that's not what the thread title reads, hmm?

[3b1r4h]

legalizing all drugs will never happen, some drugs are just too dangerous. not to yourself, but to other people.

weed however...

remember farmers? they'd be back.

and hemp is an AWESOME byproduct than can be made into cloth, paper, or pressed into plywood (among 4 million other applications)

[lamewadd]

legalizing all drugs will never happen, some drugs are just too dangerous. not to yourself, but to other people.

weed however...

remember farmers? they'd be back.

and hemp is an AWESOME byproduct than can be made into cloth, paper, or pressed into plywood (among 4 million other applications)

Farmers are making a ridiculous amount of money right now, with the idiotic subsidies for ethanol.

And lots of plants can be made into cloth, paper, plywood, etc etc etc. There's no logic behind saying that it can be made into X when it's silly to think that pot would somehow be able to one-up wood and cotton.

[3b1r4h]

your name is soooo appropriate.

besides farmers are very hurt. with you know, GAS prices and all for their 500,000 dollar tractors that they pay off for their entire lifetime.

but hey i don't need to tell you any of this.

[Penance]

legalizing all drugs will never happen, some drugs are just too dangerous. not to yourself, but to other people.

weed however...

remember farmers? they'd be back.

this is a very valid point. the american farmer really is dying out. at least if they could grow and sell marijuana they could actualy afford to live their lives rather than struggling the whole way. i'd totaly become a marijuana farmer. time to move to cali, gotta love prop 215.

[AkumaTX]

those who use it will use it more freely and those who dont use or do on rare ocassions will still continue as they were. Its like drinking. Some people do it, but not everyone. Of course there are some drugs that could never be legalized because of their high nature of addiction and the negative impacts it has on you and those around, much worse than alcohol, but i could see some being valid.

*closes door and locks self in the republican closet again*

[DropOff]

Regardless, I'll probably smoke a little weed tomorrow, and I'd expect it to be no more than the normal amount...

[lamewadd]

your name is soooo appropriate.

besides farmers are very hurt. with you know, GAS prices and all for their 500,000 dollar tractors that they pay off for their entire lifetime.

but hey i don't need to tell you any of this.

This ignores how the government is trying to fix the gas prices by buying massive amounts of ethanol.

Seriously! That was like...half of Ron Paul's campaign, and lots of SRKers rationalized all sorts of shit.

It's a substantive, often emphasized campaign issue....

[Rhio2k]

The prison population would plummet. Rather than being thrown into a violent environment that breeds criminal behavior, many, many people would have a chance to have normal, productive lives.

I don't think so. Suddenly, you'll find a certain segment being tossed in for 5-30 years for jay-walking and speeding. Life for domestic stuff. Gotta find SOMETHING to prosecute and incarcerate 'em for while everyone else who commits these offenses gets time-served probation and house arrest.

[Rhio2k]

I like that for whatever reason you specified caucasian kids.

:rofl:

Highest segment of the population that uses illegal drugs. Hispanic kids come second.

[angryliberal]

:tdown:

Terrible post.

If heroin was legalized, how much do you think the government would tax on it? And how quick do you think somebody would plow through a 40k/year salary on it? I can confidently say it would be quick enough to notice that you could get it much cheaper from the guy behind the Home Depot, rather than spending 8 bucks per hit. You could make a (weak) case that it would be different for pot, but that's not what the thread title reads, hmm?

we could go on and on about this, but the fact remains that the war on drugs, even the dangerous ones like heroin, has produced more death, tax dollars, and ruined lives than ANY amount of problems associated with making the drug legal. it is through it's forbidden status that it has created a market that has comfortably funded terrorist activities for many years, it has funded the cartels and the violent drug dealers and has continued to give them strong motivation to never quit, no matter the risk. this doesn't include the overwhleming strain on our law enforcement, fighting a war that CAN NOT be won. it is impossible. the amount we spend on fighting the war on drugs increases every single year and the results never change.

now, do i think it's ok for people to go take meth, crack, or heroin? no, not at all. they are dangerous drugs. very dangerous, and very addictive. this is where education comes in. making the drugs less taboo would open the doors for more realistic talks about drugs. i know what the conservatives are thinking "don't give me that liberal coddling bs about education working...", but honestly, how well has law enforcement worked? see, the people who do drugs, are going to find a way to do them, damn the law and damn everyone else. you can't change that and no amount of our tax dollars, innocent people's lives, mandatory minimum sentence, spoon fed propaganda, or anything else will change that.

those people are sick, they aren't criminals. they need help, and throwing them into a large mixing bowl of criminals is definately not the way to fix a sick person. hey, but it's easy and makes white people feel safe.

[Adam Warlock]

How exactly do you classify Ecstacy as a light drug? You realize every pill in existance contains some sort of Heroin or cocaine right? And the different combinations of the two give each it's unique 'effect.' Sometimes they add mescaline too... those are trippy ;)

While there aren't any more that are "pure", I've never believed the coke theory. If you're cutting pills with coke you're losing money.

[Kromo]

Well, at first everything would seem fine, people can get their weed from shoppers drug mart, crack heads would have a ball at the clinic/arcade, there would be fewer pricks on the internet, less traffic on the streets since everyone is in their basement. But the, the world would probably break in two. A crack running north to south across the entire planet. The people of the western hemisphere will experience rapid and asymmetric night and days as the broken half rotates oddly, the separation of the earth would effectively destroy the atmosphere, changing the composition so that light refracts differently. I think it would be an awesome 24 hours of phantasmagoric lights and hallucinations from oxygen deprivation as the planet hurtles itself towards the sun and total incernation. The other half would experience a relatively slow cold death as what little atmosphere dissipates and the planet tumbles out of the solar system to the deep dark reaches of space. Lots of suffocation and head explodage. Not much would happen for a few million years but I'm pretty sure that it would eventually collide with a planet whose dominant species just legalized drugs that morning...That planets name? Earth.

[PanderanGambler]

I'd get stoned legally?

[Big Pete Roasa]

My drugs are legal I just obtain them illegally now if they make Vicodin and o.c's available without a script I'll be the happiest fucking man on the planet.

[Rooks4]

Nonsense. You talk about ecstacy then you talk about MDMA as actual compound. The fact that you got flaky pills from dealers doesn't mean "every xtc pill in existance" contains heroin or coke. This is ludicrous.

Fair enough, but 10 years ago that was the norm, and you were paying 50$ a pill for the ones worth taking. I'm not sure what your background is and I don't really care, but considering this is what I experienced in 'those days' is what im basing my opinion on. Beyond that, I'll give you that my actual knowledge of MDMA itself is limited so I went ahead and read up on it - and in reading it mentions its VERY COMMON for other additives, including coke, heroin, and a plethora of other things to exist in pills. As a matter of fact the wiki page mentions that a large portion of pills tested are "mostly pure" which means very little extra substances are added, but they are STILL added.

If you think you are getting 100% MDMA in every pill and nothing else has been added, you are crazy. I don't think that's what you are saying, and after re-reading what *I* wrote I can understand why you come off this way, but I didn't mean EVERY SINGLE PILL ever - just plenty of them from 'my time.'


OK, so you were never into it - but you know enough about it already to classify it as a "heavy" drug, because people "OD-ed on them all the time".

Recognize what im saying. I wasn't into it, which means I wasn't doing 10packs every 3rd day of the week. I wasn't dealing and I didn't look forward for my next roll on Monday morning at school. Just about EVERY SINGLE one of my friends, however, were like that. Which was very unfortunate. Most of my freinds moved on to snow and eventually left Ecstasy, but I don't see any larger detriment to their health/behavior between the two. ANd yes, every Rave I went to, every "rolling party" that had more than 100 people at it, at LEAST 1 person was hospitalized. Some of my freinds were taking 10+ a 'party' because they grew up a tolerance (their words, not mine) and would do some really crazy shit. Maybe you can grow a tolerance, I wasn't a heavy enough user to find out. I considered it heavy because everything we got back in the day was laced with some shit.


This is still MDMA you're talking about yeah?

I was talking about Ecstasy, and I believe you made the distinction between an Ecstasy Pill and MDMA already, so let's not get confused.

Look up some statistics on how many OD cases there are in your area and compare which ones of them fall into coke, heroin or mdma.

I concede this point - I'll give you that MDMA/Ecstasy is a Designer drug that is MUCH LESS abused than Coke/Heroin and probably less addictive in most cases. I'm not a scientist nor have I taken enough time/effort to research their OD statistics etc - I would ASSUME that it's much easier to OD on Coke/Heroin vs Ecstasy, but I'll also argue that Coke/Heroin has a MUCH HIGHER usage rate as well.


Furthermore, OD cases for habitual drug users is far lower compared to that of meth or heroin junkies. In terms of symptoms suppression and damage limitation your chances of survival are much higher if you OD on MDMA rather than heroin/coke.


Furthermore nothing.. Yay, if you OD on MDMA you have a higher survival rate than Heroin/coke. I never said Ecstasy was WORSE than either of those - why are you arguing the subject? You are wasting my time with this. I've never thought otherwise.


And spend the gains in new therapies & healthcare research for people who decide to dabble in heroin, crack or meth - due to their addictive capabilities?

If you've been following research, they already have a drug that nullifies the high of Heroin and Crack Cocaine. I don't see how this is going to help, since it might nullify the high but doesn't stop the drugs from invading your blood, so you will just be prone to OD faster. Not sure about meth, and it doesn't matter. Quit bringing up shit that has nothing to do with anything that I said.

The *FACT* is that we spend billions of dollars on drugs. This thread was about the legalization of ALL light drugs, or ALL drugs. And in either case the money saved on "the war on drugs" and the tax revenues would fucking skyrocket. You don't know what the fuck you are talking about because you didn't bother to read the first post apparently.


Newsflash: A gajilion people all over the country already smoke weed, you just don't know about it.

Now you are just running your fat fucking mouth. Yea, I REALLY don't know that a ton of people smoke weed. How fucking stupid are you? Where did I say that? You are taking what I said out of context so you can run around flapping your pussy all over this thread.


This ranges from people that smoke once a year for old times sake down to people that smoke every day. From royalty to straight ghetto. Every.single.layer in society. Making it legal just increases the visibility for the supplying organisation (notice that I don't say THE government since private companies would want a piece of the pie too).

Thank you Captain Obvious.


lol at "All heavy smokers are dumb as rock but i've got friends that partake and got supersmart because of non heavy toking". How fucking stupid is this shit? This is as ignorant as saying "I hate fucking black people because of abc but I'm not a racist because I got a black friend too." GTFO with that shit. Just because YOUR heavy toking friends/associates are dumb as fuck doesn't imply that every other heavy smoker is. Look at you for example, you claim to abstain and you still managed to write down some incredibly dumb shit. Let alone how stupid you would be if you'd smoke.

Again you aren't taking the time to read my fucking post. You are obviously passionate about your Ecstasy/Weed smoking behaviors and trying to protect them, or perhaps just looking to pick a fight with someone on the Internets.

What I was saying is that I know a lot of people who smoke weed that can make a life for themselves. It doesn't automatically make you "retarded" as some people like to assume (The Government and anti-weed lobbyists etc.) My point was that of the HEAVY smokers/stoners/pot heads (you know the type im talking about) all of them turn out pretty fucking stupid. I have friends in both categories and it comes down to whether the person understands moderation or not. THAT was the point I was trying to make, and if you want to spin it like I don't know what the fuck im talking about then you can just eat a dick.



Every mood altering substance has this effect. You try memorizing something when you're on alcohol, mdma, coke, heroin, weed - it don't matter because you won't be able to learn for shit anyway for the duration that the compound is in your system. This is a perfect example of miseducation recycled by someone who's too stupid to do to their homework on the drugs subject.

Bullshit. You fucking burn braincells, just like someone who's a massive alchoholic. You don't just "not learn" but kill your ability to do so with extensively heavy use. That doesn't mean you CAN'T learn. But most Pot Heads/Heavy users don't just up and QUIT and go on the straight and narrow and attempt to make something of themselves... I wouldn't attribute that to the drug use, but more of a motivational issue with their personality that most of these types have in common.


I'm hoping your post is just bait because it dumbs this thread down - turning it into yet another bullshit drugs thread on SRK.

I think you are overreacting and looking for reasons to whine bitch and make yourself look smarter than you really are for the sake of your love for drugs.

Or you are just an asshole.


As for me, I don't think the world is ready yet for full scale legalisation of everything. Perhaps begin slowly and do weed only, because you could argue that it can be consumed without further processing or modification. But even that is going to be a very slow and painful process. You'll have too many stake holders trying to get a piece of the pie, ranging from government to companies like Pfizer and Walmart. Not to mention the logistics/operational side of things - in the cross over phase from illegal to legal you'll get criminal gangs targeting the storage of the drugs and other criminal behaviour. But I don't think these are the real problems. The real problem is how to change people perception and the attitude towards drugs - whilst providing unbiased information about their respective effects.

Great. Now we get to your opinion and you can't even stay on fucking topic. Who cares if you think we aren't ready for full scale legislation? Did you read the topic? Let me quote the 2 scenarios:


Here are the two scenarios I'm thinking about:

1) Light drugs, such as weed, ecstacy, and mild hallucinagens are legalized.

2) All drugs, including heavy stuff like heroin, are legalized.

What do you guys think would happen?


So you answered nothing. You bitched up a storm about how my knowledge is lesser than yours in Ecstasy, except all you did was talk about MDMA. Grats. Then you went on a pussy rant about other drugs and how they are heavier than MDMA which I never argued with.

Then you throw some insults, finally get to the topic, and fail miserably at even providing anything worthwhile to the thread.

:pray: You have shown me the ways of a true troll on SRK. Way to go.

While there aren't any more that are "pure", I've never believed the coke theory. If you're cutting pills with coke you're losing money.

I'm not sure they'd LOSE money considering the price they are getting per pill and how little they'd have to mix to get an effect. But it doesn't really matter, and is a whole different topic from this thread :)

[white shadow]

As with any unprecedented phenomenon, I think the few months after formerly illegal drugs were legalized there would be a massive overuse. Once the mystique of using legalized drugs wore out, society might be able to stabilize as long as certain drugs that can harm others. Drugs like cocaine, PCP, heroin, LSD, etc... are way too dangerous for mass use. Although, I don't advocate the use of any drugs.

[True Grave]

This isn't a thread for debate on whether or not they should be. I am merely putting forth a hypothetical question. It occured to me after reading this article:

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSN0227006420080602?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews&rpc=22&sp=true

About mexican drug cartels murdering mayors and federal agents. I think the drug cartels would lose a lot of power if drugs were legalized, but would society suffer as a result?

Here are the two scenarios I'm thinking about:

1) Light drugs, such as weed, ecstacy, and mild hallucinagens are legalized.

2) All drugs, including heavy stuff like heroin, are legalized.

What do you guys think would happen?

Any druggies out there that like to use that stuff would probably rejoice, while everyone else that doesn't probably wouldn't care.

That is, until the first incidents of major traffic accidents begin occurring because a druggie was behind the wheel.

Then the circle might continue with those lobbying for such drugs to be made illegal again, once it became apparent that the average such user is a complete idiot and presents a danger to himself and others once he gets his fix.

Non-drug users like myself probably wouldn't care about those out there that want to get high & stuff, until they start to do dumb shit that endangers the rest of us. Perhaps if there was a way to ENSURE those proven addicted to the drugs were NOT allowed to legally own stuff like cars & guns, and thus the danger they pose to others is minimized. It might be more acceptable.

[angryliberal]

we let people drink and own cars...ow is that any less dangerous?

[fishjie]

As with any unprecedented phenomenon, I think the few months after formerly illegal drugs were legalized there would be a massive overuse.

no. as i said before, the reason people dont do drugs is not because of legality. if crack were legal tomorrow, the only people who would go out and buy it are people who do it already. a regular joe whose smart enough not to do it now would be smart enough not to after its legal. if the regular joe had wanted to do so, he would have been able to.

[angryliberal]

i agree with fish here, the majority of people won't just up and do drugs because they are legal. there will be a small increase in the numbers of use, but i don't think the numbers would be significant enough to make a major shift in society. the amount of people who don't do drugs simply because they are illegal is not huge...most people who don't take drugs do it because either they know they don't want to or for safety reasons. the law has very little bearing on what people do in their privates lives.

[Nando]

Yeah, by far I think drinking is the biggest "gateway" drug out there. I like weed a lot better than drinking. Well, there different, but, I'd be smoking weed a lot more. Wathcing movies and play ninja gaiden.(summer atleast)

[3b1r4h]

thank you angry liberal for making a point i was just about to type up.

just because it's legal to do a drugs doesn't mean it's legal to walk into a day care and shoot heroin in your eye! just like alchohol and to a lesser extent cigarettes, you won't be able to do it wherever you want. I'd hope that if you're smoking meth at work (if your job allows it) you're taking that shit outside or somewhere where I won't be bothered by huge plumes of chemicals and you coughing and gasping. and i dunno if you guys know this but at least in PA you don't get charged with drunk driving, it's driving while intoxicated which ALREADY covers these thing so i don't understand why you are worried about accidents. it's not like people don't already use this stuff anyway.


besides, if i could shoot heroin legally i'm probably not going to drive anywhere, i'm gonna lay in bed and throw up 17 times and enjoy every single minute of it.

[lamewadd]

snip.

Saying that they've only become popular, despite the danger, because they are illegal gets into a chicken-or-egg argument at best, despite the obvious aspect that people DID take it and ruin themselves before the shit was banned.

Not that any of this matters. If everything was legalized tomorrow, which is the point of this thread thread, you wouldn't have drug dealers calling it quits on a mammoth industry like the illegal drug trade and the "War" On Drugs would end up becoming like the FBI intimidating people who run booze out of Mexico. Except the drug dealers will still have guns.

[3b1r4h]

nobody "ruined" any drug except for the gov't using it to create racist and classist laws.

do your homework.

[BBQ]

Just on my own perspective, I would probably be a marijuanalic. And then do lsd once in a while on the weekends.

[Yansoma]

While there aren't any more that are "pure", I've never believed the coke theory. If you're cutting pills with coke you're losing money.

Wow that Rook fella is a fucking retard to the highest degree when it comes to ecstasy.

I mean seriously, does anyone realize that coke/heroin are most potent via directly to the bloodstream, and considering the fact that a couple fucking MILLIGRAMS would be pressed in a pill wouldn't even make a noticeable difference.

It's like shit dumb ghetto drug dealers say when they try to sell ecstasy. "oh yeah mean these got coke in em bro, real strong" GTFO with that bull

Oh and this whole Mescaline in ecstasy pill thing your talking about, which someone obviously lied to you about, in all likelihood it was MDA.

[angryliberal]

Saying that they've only become popular, despite the danger, because they are illegal gets into a chicken-or-egg argument at best, despite the obvious aspect that people DID take it and ruin themselves before the shit was banned.

Not that any of this matters. If everything was legalized tomorrow, which is the point of this thread thread, you wouldn't have drug dealers calling it quits on a mammoth industry like the illegal drug trade and the "War" On Drugs would end up becoming like the FBI intimidating people who run booze out of Mexico. Except the drug dealers will still have guns.

so, you don't understand middle class america at all i see...or basic economics...maybe both...

as for the bolded part, i wonder, do you simply just start typing with no regards to what you said or are you just dumb?

we have almost NO model to base the outcome of mass legalization on, but certain assumptions can be made. one thing we know for sure is that the war on drugs has not only failed at it's supposed task of "ridding the drug problem", but it has also created a self sustaining vacuum - it's a social paradox, the illegal drug trade wouldn't exist without the war on drugs, a war which aims to fight the illegal drug trade...it's a complete mockery.

[fishjie]

isnt lamewad = spudlyff8fan?

you might as well bash your head against a brick wall.

[DarthTrey]

i agree with fish here, the majority of people won't just up and do drugs because they are legal. there will be a small increase in the numbers of use, but i don't think the numbers would be significant enough to make a major shift in society. the amount of people who don't do drugs simply because they are illegal is not huge...most people who don't take drugs do it because either they know they don't want to or for safety reasons. the law has very little bearing on what people do in their privates lives.

I agree with you both. I think the people that are against the legalization are failing to realize that all the War on Drugs has done is waste money and lives. How they don't see this is beyond me as there have been multiple posts about that exact action.




People don't drink because it's legal. People drink to get drunk.
People won't smoke crack because it's legal, they will do it to get fucked up.

FFS the Prohibition is a mirror image of what's going on and post Prohibition is a mirror image of what would happen if they were legalized.

Look at the Netherlands if you need further proof of how legalizing and governing these things posts exponential more benefits than banning it.

[angryliberal]

isnt lamewad = spudlyff8fan?

you might as well bash your head against a brick wall.

i've thought this form the first lamewad post i read, but people keep insisting he's not spud...

[Bowza]

This ignores how the government is trying to fix the gas prices by buying massive amounts of ethanol.

Seriously! That was like...half of Ron Paul's campaign, and lots of SRKers rationalized all sorts of shit.

It's a substantive, often emphasized campaign issue....

Well...you guys are right on both sides- there are farmers that are doing very well due to government subsidies, and there are other farmers(small-time) that are doing very poorly. Personally I think the gov't should just get out of the whole business of it- but a free-market doesn't look like its on the horizon.

Anyway, the idea that there would be a sudden epidemic of people hopped up on drugs after its legalization is really stretching it. Its not like you'd be able to do drugs wherever you want, since they will definitely be banned in most all private areas of operation. Employers won't want drug users working for them either- and will continue with drug tests.

To say that some drugs are just "too dangerous" for society is ridiculous- as everyone's been saying, people will do it regardless of its legality. If someone becomes a "danger" to someone else while under the influence, then they should be tried for whatever offense they committed, whether its murder, assault, or rape. No different than if someone is drunk and does the same thing.

Education is the best way to stop what is essentially a medical problem- not locking people up.

[fishjie]

i've thought this form the first lamewad post i read, but people keep insisting he's not spud...

was there an ip check done? it might be his brother or cousin or something. runs in the family....

[angryliberal]

i love the "facts about marijuana" ad on the side there...ironically, the link probably leads to a bunch of lies about marijuana...

[fishjie]

fact

marijuana causes you to kill little girls on bikes because you were too stoned to pay attention to where you were driving

[white shadow]

no. as i said before, the reason people dont do drugs is not because of legality. if crack were legal tomorrow, the only people who would go out and buy it are people who do it already. a regular joe whose smart enough not to do it now would be smart enough not to after its legal. if the regular joe had wanted to do so, he would have been able to.

It has nothing to do with the legality, but what the change represents. Similar to how everyone wanted an iPhone just to be a part of the enigma or trend, there would be many who were teetering towards drugs that now can rationalize taking it immediately... at least for that small period of excitement.

I wouldn't envision this being an isolated incident, and thus would cause an upsurge temporarily in usage. I find it unrealistic to think some people who didn't try drugs or would try drugs later wouldn't have any incentive at all if a law was passed. People live in grey as well, not just white and black.

[Bowza]

It has nothing to do with the legality, but what the change represents. Similar to how everyone wanted an iPhone just to be apart of the enigma or trend, there would be many who were teetering towards drugs that now can rationalize taking it immediately... at least that small period of excitement.

I wouldn't envision this being an isolated incident, and thus would cause an upsurge temporarily in usage. I find it unrealistic to think people who didn't try drug or would try drugs later wouldn't have any incentive at all if a law was passed. People live in grey as well, not just white and black.

I suppose this is possible- but again it was their own decision to OD on something if thats what they end up doing. No remorse for that.

[Raziel321]

If you want to live some place where drugs are practically legal, I'd suggest moving out to California

[MuD]

WITHOUT READING THE THREAD:
1)Everyone deals.
2)Everyone buys.
3)Drug companies get in, saying they have pure, authentic stuff.
4)People still buy from local weed man, unless they're having a special party.
5)Prices go down with more competition
6)Heroin/Cocaine/Meth use SKYROCKETS.
7)Health insurance starts asking about drug use, charge more money for it/drop you if you lie.
8)GAS PRICES STAY THE SAME
9)Underground drug syndacates initially lose money, but realize that people always come back to shit they're addicted to.
10)I try weed for the first time, just to shut up all the people that "just wanna see me high"

[fishjie]

It has nothing to do with the legality, but what the change represents. Similar to how everyone wanted an iPhone just to be a part of the enigma or trend, there would be many who were teetering towards drugs that now can rationalize taking it immediately... at least for that small period of excitement.

I wouldn't envision this being an isolated incident, and thus would cause an upsurge temporarily in usage. I find it unrealistic to think some people who didn't try drugs or would try drugs later wouldn't have any incentive at all if a law was passed. People live in grey as well, not just white and black.

actually, it would work in the reverse. a lot of kids these days who drink or smoke at such a young age do so because its illegal and makes them "cool". take away that "cool" factor by legalizing it, and they have far less incentive to do so. this is why countries with a far lower drinking age have people who are way more chill about drinking. compare and contrast to high school kids in america who drink until they black out.

and you have to understand how easy it is to get drugs. not only is it easy to get illegal drugs, there are LEGAL drugs right now that you can get with a prescription (vicodin, oxycodone, etc). hell, you can get high off sniffing glue or paint if you wanted to. those are all legal things you can do, and yet there is hardly an epidemic of glue sniffers...

[white shadow]

I suppose this is possible- but again it was their own decision to OD on something if thats what they end up doing. No remorse for that.

Not to go on some anti-drug tirade, but if someone ODs with no immediate family then we the citizens will have to pay for autopsy, processing, and cremation via the state which I'm sure that isn't cheap. Nothing completely happens in a vacuum.

That said, there are other prescription drugs that are even more abused than say marijuana like oxycontin, many of them even have suicide as a potential side effect written on the label. So yes, our society functions on loopy logic.

actually, it would work in the reverse. a lot of kids these days who drink or smoke at such a young age do so because its illegal and makes them "cool". take away that "cool" factor by legalizing it, and they have far less incentive to do so. this is why countries with a far lower drinking age have people who are way more chill about drinking. compare and contrast to high school kids in america who drink until they black out.

and you have to understand how easy it is to get drugs. not only is it easy to get illegal drugs, there are LEGAL drugs right now that you can get with a prescription (vicodin, oxycodone, etc). hell, you can get high off sniffing glue or paint if you wanted to. those are all legal things you can do, and yet there is hardly an epidemic of glue sniffers...

Many kids do stuff to just to do stuff, not everything follows a simple rationale of "cool" with them or anyone for that matter. I'm sure after a while the legal presence of drugs would overthrow the need to use, but for kids and adults alike who normally didn't think about taking drugs or experimenting, they would feel more inclined to even try for the sake of trying. So yes it is true that countries like Germany with lower drinking ages have teens that are less prone to be alcoholics but at the same time there was no dichotomy to give them any incentive towards those behaviors initially, drinking was a part of their culture for centuries.

We live in a puritanical society that would still have moralistic problems with this and probe at the thought processes of people who never really gave the idea of drugs any consideration... some would abstain, some would be eager to try once or twice, but the legalizing event would be the impetus of this decision.

[Rooks4]

Wow that Rook fella is a fucking retard to the highest degree when it comes to ecstasy.

I mean seriously, does anyone realize that coke/heroin are most potent via directly to the bloodstream, and considering the fact that a couple fucking MILLIGRAMS would be pressed in a pill wouldn't even make a noticeable difference.

It's like shit dumb ghetto drug dealers say when they try to sell ecstasy. "oh yeah mean these got coke in em bro, real strong" GTFO with that bull

Oh and this whole Mescaline in ecstasy pill thing your talking about, which someone obviously lied to you about, in all likelihood it was MDA.

Maybe you are right, since all I've said is second hand from my own experiences years ago. No need to start calling names and shit, I was giving my knowledge from first hand, not books. I already admitted im no fucking scientist and considering I havn't gone NEAR the stuff in over 10 years I shouldn't be expected to be some kind of fucking drug-einstein.

This whole shit started with me asking why Ecstasy would be considered a 'light drug.' Instead of being a dipshit why not just explain?

Also, as for a few miligrams not mattering, from how it was explained to me in the past i thas to do with how the pill effects you. Different combinations make the effect different. It's not to get you high off the Coke or Heroin or whatever, it's to change the overall effect of the pill.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synergy is a start to see what I mean. Look under drug use. I know you know what this is, and it's the how and why I was told that kind of shit was in the pills. Maybe it was all bullshit, maybe it wasn't. I don't really give a shit at this point, and it doesn't really apply to the thread.

So instead of swallowing my dick with your superior intellect how bout you just correct and educate me, or fucking ignore it and contribute to the thread instead of going off on a tangent.

[fishjie]

Many kids do stuff to just to do stuff, not everything follows a simple rationale of "cool" with them or anyone for that matter. I'm sure after a while the legal presence of drugs would overthrow the need to use, but for kids and adults alike who normally didn't think about taking drugs or experimenting, they would feel more inclined to even try for the sake of trying. So yes it is true that countries like Germany with lower drinking ages have teens that are less prone to be alcoholics but at the same time there was no dichotomy to give them any incentive towards those behaviors initially, drinking was a part of their culture for centuries.

We live in a puritanical society that would still have moralistic problems with this and probe at the thought processes of people who never really gave the idea of drugs any consideration... some would abstain, some would be eager to try once or twice, but the legalizing event would be the impetus of this decision.

america is totally not puritanical. it pretends to be, but all xtians have sex with hookers, do drugs, and drink. its the complete antithesis of puritan. the thing is, all kids and adults have thought about taking drugs or experimenting. seriously who hasn't thought of doing drugs? our whole culture, from books, ads, movies, magazines and etc is filled with sex, drugs, and alcohol.

you are assuming majority of people don't do drugs, but i'm pretty sure majority of people have done illegal drugs at some point in their lives. i'm too lazy to look up the statistics to back this up.

[white shadow]

america is totally not puritanical. it pretends to be, but all xtians have sex with hookers, do drugs, and drink. its the complete antithesis of puritan. the thing is, all kids and adults have thought about taking drugs or experimenting. seriously who hasn't thought of doing drugs? our whole culture, from books, ads, movies, magazines and etc is filled with sex, drugs, and alcohol.

you are assuming majority of people don't do drugs, but i'm pretty sure majority of people have done illegal drugs at some point in their lives. i'm too lazy to look up the statistics to back this up.

People are hypocrites, what's new? That doesn't change the fact that an American male will be opposed to drugs, hookers, and drunkardness but will proceed with all those vices when the sun has set. Americans live under guidelines which are housed under xtian precepts, and regularly return to them when applicable.

And while I'm sure a significant portion of the population has done drugs at some point or another, it doesn't mean they continue to do so- or that in their interim the legalization wouldn't compel them to try with more confidence during the initial period.

[gkrohwon]

i think the main problem with crack cocaine is that at the current price, people who do it get broke fast. and people who often do it, dont have much money to begin with. or if they do. the fact that they want to try it means they are looking for help or to escape so if they do have ajob and money. they can mess up their money. not to mention the hunger repressing effects and sleep you'll miss.

that is essentially the main problem with drugs is that life is so bad for some people, the last thing they need is drugs.

i am pretty sure as long as you are fulfilled as a person, like living the life you want. no regrets. its kindsof rare. you wont get in trouble with any drug you try now and then.

however the best thing is legalize everything. wherever there is a will there is a way. legalization plays no role in keeping good people off of drugs. but if they legalized it and made it cheap to use and available. at least the crime would die down, and crackheads wouldnt be robbing places and prositituion wouldnt need to be turned to to make a buck.


so, make it so available that its worthless but if anyone wants to do it they can. and then give the money that fights drugs to the welfare system. the poor will have more money and less stress, if they want to do crack or something, its there and its cheap and wont make them broke ie desperate to rob etc. but maybe they'll just forget about it somewhat because their life has improved and they now have more hope. and kids wont be pressured into a life of drugs cause it wont even be lucrative, if their parents are on drugs, at least they got the money now to provide cause the drugs are dirt cheap.

[jae hoon]

Another thing that I am sure will be mentioned this will free up alot of the rooms in jails that are usually filled with non violent offenders. All these people getting high in their own house and not bothering anyone will no longer be getting 15 year sentences for smoking a joint. Just that alone is more then worth the legalization of it.

[TS]

Is the argument seriously that if drugs were widely available and legal, that nobody would do them who doesn't already? And/or people who do them now wouldn't do them more often?

[3b1r4h]

i think the main problem with crack cocaine is that at the current price

i dunno what the FUCK you are talking about

because crack is pretty GOD DAMN cheap in philly.

[lamewadd]

so, you don't understand middle class america at all i see...or basic economics...maybe both...

as for the bolded part, i wonder, do you simply just start typing with no regards to what you said or are you just dumb?

we have almost NO model to base the outcome of mass legalization on, but certain assumptions can be made. one thing we know for sure is that the war on drugs has not only failed at it's supposed task of "ridding the drug problem", but it has also created a self sustaining vacuum - it's a social paradox, the illegal drug trade wouldn't exist without the war on drugs, a war which aims to fight the illegal drug trade...it's a complete mockery.Nice work. I point out the massive logical flaw in your "idea" and you reply with a "you stupid."

And yeah. I made a typo.

Oh wait, no I didn't. There's an illegal alcohol trade in people running it from Mexico, and an illegal tobacco trade where people sell it sans taxes. Rest of the post is bullshit. Fail. ggpo.

[fishjie]

Is the argument seriously that if drugs were widely available and legal, that nobody would do them who doesn't already? And/or people who do them now wouldn't do them more often?

the first part yes - to an extent. there will be some new users, but the vast majority of buyers will be those who bought illegally in the first place. to argue against that is to be ignorant of how many people do drugs in the first place, and ignorant of why people choose to (and not to) do drugs.

although the last part isn't accurate. because they're legal, ppl who do them now would do it more often because its far cheaper.

[HuStLeMaN17]

legalization imo is gonna happen sooner than later, a change we can believe in. YES WE CAN! obama, here he comes...

btw obama already has clip on youtube about easing weed laws.

[ElderGOD]

because its far cheaper.

You really don't know the government too well do you? They would tax the shit out of it and make it so expensive that even if it were legal you still wouldn't be buying it from stores.

Shit, even regular food is getting so expensive people going to start growing their own :rofl:

[fishjie]

You really don't know the government too well do you? They would tax the shit out of it and make it so expensive that even if it were legal you still wouldn't be buying it from stores.

Shit, even regular food is getting so expensive people going to start growing their own :rofl:

no.

illegal things raise the cost of an item because it makes them harder to come by. factored into the cost of an item is the higher risk involved in producing and selling said item. less supply + same demand = higher cost

legalizing something means many companies are producing it.
greater supply + same demand = lower cost

this is simple capitalism at work here.

taxes wouldn't even come close. according to your argument, the price of alcohol would have increased since prohibition.

[angryliberal]

the price of weed, good weed that is, is definately based off it's illegality. weed is so cheap to produce, even the really good stuff. hell, once you get a good plant, you just clone it from there on out...so the cost of weed would decrease rapidly while the quality increased. same for mushrooms...these items require almost no proccessing, just dry times and packaging.