Obama to end the war on drugs?

[Jacob]

I don't smoke pot myself, and I find most pot culture fairly unappealing. Still, legalizing it makes sense from my POV. In addition to the basic libertarian argument, which has some merit, I think removing a massive source of income for organized crime is very important. Transferring some of that income to the state in the form of taxation is good, even if it's as simple as the income tax generated from the now legal pot growing and distribution businesses. And, for the US, stopping the massive waste of human capital by incarcerating people for pot is a pretty strong argument as well.

[mongers]

I don't smoke pot myself, and I find most pot culture fairly unappealing. Still, legalizing it makes sense from my POV. In addition to the basic libertarian argument, which has some merit, I think removing a massive source of income for organized crime is very important. Transferring some of that income to the state in the form of taxation is good, even if it's as simple as the income tax generated from the now legal pot growing and distribution businesses. And, for the US, stopping the massive waste of human capital by incarcerating people for pot is a pretty strong argument as well.

I wouldn't disagree with a word of that. 

In my experience the downsides to using too much dope are their own 'rewards' and as you say, pretty unappealing. 

If I had to put a figure on it, I'd say towards 50% of the people I've known who've extensively smoked pot when on to develop some form of mental health issue. Now if this was a pre-existing problem, a genetic vulnerability to the side effects or an actual outcome from using too much, I don't know. 

But it does annoy mean when people champion the health benefits of cannabis, without ever acknowledging the downsides, it's like they joined a little cult. 

[Iormlund]

If I had to put a figure on it, I'd say towards 50% of the people I've known who've extensively smoked pot when on to develop some form of mental health issue. Now if this was a pre-existing problem, a genetic vulnerability to the side effects or an actual outcome from using too much, I don't know. 

The kids I knew that ended up spending time on an mental institution were already a bit off before taking drugs (and not just pot). The shit they did seems to have exacerbated those problems.

[Razgovory]

Effect on productivity doesn't seem to be a legit reason for a criminal prohibition.  Alchohol has massive negative effects on productivity; the economic costs of alchohol consumption would have to counted in many billions of dollars.  No one serious seems to think that a valid basis for re-imposing Prohibition.

Didn't the soviets do something like that in 1980's?  I think they restricted access to alcohol and there was a dramatic decrease in accidental death.  Unfortunately booze sales were also a major source of income so that didn't help the revenue shortfalls they were already having.

[OttoVonBismarck]

I'd be fine with Federal law enforcement only focusing on organized criminal drug operations, large scale smuggling, large scale manufacturing etc of illegal drugs. The minor drug offenders who run afoul of Federal drug law I'm fine with us not dealing with those at the Federal level. I'd likewise say Federal grants to local governments could be changed so they emphasize more of the large offender arrests instead of piddling crimes.

But I wouldn't want us to totally stop the DEA in its tracks or anything for a simple reason. Drugs in general will never be legalized, period. So there will always be a black market, black markets give rise to dangerous, destabilizing, and violent criminal organizations that it is definitely in society's interests to fight--regardless of what product they're running. (Be it a protection racket, prostitution, drugs, etc.)

The reason drugs will never be fully legalized is in the nature of what drugs are and the implications of legalization. I could see legalization of basically "all plants." You know, if you want to grow poppy or hemp then yeah, I think we can legalize that some day and maybe even will.

But refined drugs, especially methamphetamine but also heroin and cocaine which are made from plants but processed down through a more sophisticated process than say opium or marijuana I don't see how we'd ever legalize them.

For one, meth, heroin, and cocaine you can all overdose on. Heroin I believe easiest of the three, and let's not forget morphine, and barbiturates which are also potentially easy to kill yourself with. What this basically means, is they are a dangerous product and it's unlikely the government would ever be willing to say "yeah you can just make this shit." Even if the government was willing to do that, the problem then is, who would make it? Product liability for a legalized heroin manufacturer could potentially be massive. Now, maybe we just treat it like we do alcohol, but the reality is I think it'd be hard to imagine a legal regime that wouldn't have to treat it like pharmaceuticals. Namely because unlike alcohol any legal manufacturer of these refined drugs would have the same motivations as criminals to adulterate and dilute them, and that means we can't say what people are taking and the inconsistent dosing causes legal problems. So I think the government would have to regulate the manufacturers the same way they regulate pharmaceutical companies. But even the smallest generic pharmaceutical company (I imagine the big boys will not want to touch this business) is unlikely to want all the bad press and legal troubles of being associated with heroin/meth manufacturing for recreational use.

[derspiess]

Effect on productivity doesn't seem to be a legit reason for a criminal prohibition. 

Jeez people, I was kidding!

[Josquius]

I'd be fine with Federal law enforcement only focusing on organized criminal drug operations, large scale smuggling, large scale manufacturing etc of illegal drugs. The minor drug offenders who run afoul of Federal drug law I'm fine with us not dealing with those at the Federal level. I'd likewise say Federal grants to local governments could be changed so they emphasize more of the large offender arrests instead of piddling crimes.

The trouble is where would you draw the line.
Sounds like it could be easy for big organised crime operations to establish some sort of franchise/sub-contracting system to make everything technically be smaller operations.

[Razgovory]

So if we legalize pot are there any other drugs that we are going to legalize?

[citizen k]

See BB, people can actually decide not to use even when it is freely available.

BB, the day after drugs are legalized:

[DGuller]

Never smoked pot, I was little scared off by how many people I know who do smoke pot claim almost with pride that their memory is shot.  My brain is my biggest asset, I try not doing things that would damage it.

[The Larch]

Languish is full of squares, film at 11.

[Martinus]

Marti is full of it.  If he really wanted to experiment he lived how may minutes away from Amsterdam at one point?

Should I have taken a 2-hour train to Amsterdam on my own, to try a new drug I don't know how I would have reacted to in some seedy coffee-shop completely alone, or should I have rather asked my colleagues at the law firm I was seconded to, to go with me?

Are you a fucking retard?

[Martinus]

I don't think that's a relevant situation though.  You lived all your life in a permissive society, but you haven't seen the transition from restrictive to permissive, in terms of drug use.

You miss the point.

People experiment in their teens, when it is illegal to take drugs, rather than as adults, when it would be tolerated. So not only the law fails to deter illegal use, but whether you allow adult drug use is largely irrelevant since the time of experimenting is long past.

I disagree. The fact that middle aged artists and similar type of people (i.e. those less concerned with criminal convictions having an impact on their professional lifes) continue to experiment with drugs proves you wrong. I am going to concede that teenagers are more likely to do things that could potentially destroy their future careers, but that's about it.

By the way, I am for drug legalization for this very reason - I don't think people should be afraid to use drugs for recreational purposes when they want to, but I recognize criminalization is a powerful deterrent for otherwise law-abiding adults.

[The Larch]

Marti is full of it.  If he really wanted to experiment he lived how may minutes away from Amsterdam at one point?

Should I have taken a 2-hour train to Amsterdam on my own, to try a new drug I don't know how I would have reacted to in some seedy coffee-shop completely alone, or should I have rather asked my colleagues at the law firm I was seconded to, to go with me?

Are you a fucking retard?

We could have gone there during the Languish meet and teach you right. 

[Martinus]

By the way, the fact that I barely drank any alcohol at all before I was 18, and now I'm borderline alcoholic (mostly joking but I like drinking), also proves that people's greatest substance (ab)use intensity does not have to happen during their teenage years.