They should be legal.

Just as a principle, I think you should be able to do whatever the hell you want as long as you don't hurt someone else in the process

Friedman and Sowell are beasts. Seriously, I can't believe that the shitheads that I went to school with have never heard of either of these two.

By the way, maybe I missed something but can someone help me understand why making drugs illegal causes drive-by's killing innocent kids in the slums and 10,000 more homicides a year? I started to get lost when we got into that.

Fully agree with friedman. Make it legal and tax the shit out of it ! There is so much income to be made by taxing these goods. It would tremendously weaken the "black economy".

However there should be restrictions. A country being known for drug tourism is not good (netherlands anyone ?). The dutch hate the fact that people just go there to smoke up, there are so many other things to do there.. (red light district.. oh no wait thats bad too... :P) Maastricht is considering allowing only dutch citizens to purchase drugs in coffee-shops to calm down the germans and belgians going there only to smoke up.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/18/world/europe/18dutch.html

I wish I had time to unpick everything he says.

Tagged to watch tonight.

Friedman is a beast for sure! I'm in full support of legalizing drugs.

Drug dealers trade in a product that is illegal so they have no recourse to the legal/justice system when they are wronged. They use violent means to enforce payment and punish theft by their sub-dealers.

Drug addicts also do desperate, often violent things to acquire drugs/drug money.

It's too late in the game. The 'war on drugs' involved a ton of negative propaganda fed to the people - the government can't suddenly change its mind and have the people do so as well. They've already been brainwashed into believing what the government wanted them to believe at the time.

I have not had a chance to watch the video yet, but a couple things come to mind.

I am all for legalizing weed for 18 year old +, but I am not sure about the harder stuff.

What do we do with all the coke and heroin heads that will surely come out of this. I dont believe for a minute that more kids wont try the stuff because it is no longer illegal. I believe we will see increase usage once society deems it legal.

Maybe I was one of the few who was extremely curious about shit as a high schooler, but the only reason I wouldnt dare touch the shit was for fear of getting in some serious trouble and fucking my future up. If I felt there were no repercussions for me I very well may have tried it *just once*.Most high schoolers dont think past that day. Today, I am smart and mature enough to know that regardless if its legal or not, I wouldnt touch the stuff. So, with more kids willing to go out and try the stuff *just once*, we are going to see a huge spike in addictive users. Heroin is something like 20% of first time users become addicted. Alcohol is in the 2-5% range. And I think we can all agree heroin is a nasty drug - there will be expenses that society will have to pick up to deal wtih the new addicts. Now, I doubt those expenses will come anywhere close to the war on drugs, but also take into account the lack of productivity we will lose from those new users as they use and die or use and then go through treatment, etc.

Also, if my memory serves me correct, the Dutch legalized everything but now they are pulling away from it all. They have seen a lot of negatives to it - from tourists coming to town just to get fucked up to mobsters proping up and running the shops on their terms even though what they were selling was legal and regulated.

I am very open about legalzing drugs completely, but I am just not sold yet that this wouldn't be absolutely detromental to our society.

^ ^ ^ ^

We all have free will, I agree. But does this mean that your free will is going to be taking my taxpayer money once you cant take care of yourself or your family? Or are we going to allow your free will to live and die by the needle and not have government support when shit hits the fan (if you are using any of the hard drugsm shit will hit the fan).

A user cant handle a stable job or life. So we will be forced to support his habit by giving him shelter, clothes, food and treatment. How long do we support the users? Indefinitley? Its the ultimate nanny state. We can force an average person who is lazy to get a job by cutting the benefits off but we cant force a heroin addict to get sober and get a job. They would rather use and die in the streets.

You can have a glass of wine (some say its even healthy) but you cant just have a shot of heroin. Shit doesnt work that way. Its a whole different ball game and world. We arent talking about having a big mac once a week, heroin will fuck you up instantly. Like I said earlier after just ONE use over 20% of users become addicted. There are real consequences to legalizing the hard stuff, its not just as easy as saying "free will, just let it be and tax the stuff".

BTW I consider myself a "light" libertarian on most issues.

BTW another thing.. .how potent are we going to make the stuff? In time, users become 'immune' to the stuff. They need more of the drug, then they need a more potent form of the drug, etc. Will the govt allow stores to sell the stuff as potent as the market calls for? If not, you have the mexico cartels next market...

Now I am no expert on this field (obviously) but I just dont think its that easy to chalk it up to free will. I think the assumptions that more kids wont try the drugs when we legalize it is completely 100% bullshit. Just think, 20% of those teens who would not have tried it otherwise are now addicted. We have lost their future productivity and now have to care for them.

I think its a much more complicated situation then what some want to believe. And I think that is why you have seen those countries who initially legalized shy away from it

I was going to add something until I read your post. Your post sums up exactly the way I think. Libertarian I assume?

Use the money being wasted on the Drug Wars for Drug Awareness techniques to keep people off drugs. Tax the shit out of the drugs and put that towards the deficit. Next...

Nobama, keep in mind that cocaine and heroin used to be legal in the US.

Is blow going to magically jump into the bodies of previous non-users?

/Scene from Mr. Griffin Goes to Washington: "Cigarettes killed my father...and raped my mother!"

Drugs remain a symptom of greater cultural/moral problems. My abstention from drugs is not legislatively induced. It is my choice not to touch the stuff.

Maybe so, but some would argue attempting to remove items from society (knives, guns, etc.) that have been ingrained in our culture and/or everyday lives is a bit different from allowing more items to be inserted. And I realize not everyone gets high and runs around and stabs people, but it does happen...and truth be told, the violent aspect, although concerning and unacceptable, probably constitutes a substantially smaller portion of the overall cost to society...#1 being medical costs (I assume, I don't have figures on this).

I think my problem with the legalization of drugs has more to do with the state that our country is currently in when it comes to personal responsibility. People want to argue that the government shouldn't be in our personal lives but the government (read: taxpayers) foot the bill, to the tune of trillions of dollars per year,for all sorts of social programs which have provided virtually no benefit to society. My point being, if someone wants to use drugs, then they shouldn't receive free or subsidized care from the taxpayers when they OD or when they become addicts. Obviously that just isn't going to happen, but serves as an example of why I disagree with it.

Another issue is testing for the effects of drugs other than alcohol. I'm not a drug master, so I don't know and maybe someone has some insight, but how do you quickly test if someone is under the influence of a drug (other than alcohol) if you are a LEO and you just pulled someone over for a tail light being out, or something of the sort? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but just asking a legitimate question. Maybe the effect of some drugs don't impair your motor skills, so they shouldn't be illegal to drive on, but what about the ones that do...do you just run a field sobriety test (maybe a newly developed one that would target the effects of certain drugs), arrest them and then run a blood test to check for it's contents and then charge them?

One problem I see with the whole issue is that I feel people are being naive when it comes to the repercussions of such a drastic change. People think that things will instantly get better because the free markets are at work, but I wholeheartedly feel things will get much worse for some period of time and then eventually get better. Obviously many people feel that some folks are driven to drugs because of the 'illegal' label they are given, but I'm hear to tell you that there are many people who don't use drugs because of that same term. I know several people, myself included, that have never done any sort of illegal substance simply because it was deemed illegal. I know personally, that the fear of being caught doing something illegal deterred me from using drugs and I know I would be much more open to trying/using them if they were legal. Again, it's anecdotal and I have no clue how many people are out there that have a similar feeling, but I think it's safe to assume that there are many.

Another issue with legalizing drugs is that it removes the 'illegal' tag which carries with it a stigma...which can act as a layer of protection from those who don't want to use them. When you are young you are far more susceptible to peer pressure. Kids involved in illegal activities will often get their friends who otherwise wouldn't be involved to do so, simply as a way of justifying to themselves that their activities really aren't 'that' bad. As a young kid/teenager you will almost inevitably be exposed to drugs and someone will most likely offer you some. If they are illegal, you can simply say no thanks man, that stuff is illegal and I could lose the football scholarship I might be getting, lose my job, etc. If it's legalized, then you are asking teenagers to stand on their own merits, which is hard enough to do as an adult. You are more likely to be pressured and/or teased for not doing something because you are "scared" or a "nerd" or "not cool" than you are because "haha, so-and-so doesn't want to break the law or be a criminal"...it's much easier to walk away from the second one.

I stand on the fence about this topic because from a moral point of view I see drugs as destructive and I've seen the harm they have caused people who are not capable of using them in a responsible manner. On the other hand, I don't care for the government's nose in the personal lives of it's citizens.

Regards

i'm cool with drugs, as long as all drugs are laced with some sort of long term birth control - i.e. you would have to be off drugs for at least a year before u r able to impregnate/get pregnant

Yeah, I posted all that before I got down to your posts...so it's basically a accidental rehash. Maybe you're a brother from another mother, lol.

Regards

I was addressing INCENTIVES. You are addressing CORRELATIONS.

Does an embezzler also cheat on his taxes? Yes.

Does a murderer likely rape? Yes.

Different points of discussion.

Yes a criminal has an incentive to commit more crimes because the nature of his activities don't allow him to call the police and seek reputable justice...but who says that a person, willing to break the law in the first place, would make the more reasonable decision?

Good point, if we legalize embezzlement then we will certainly have less tax cheats...but that seems like a awfully expensive way of curbing tax fraud. Besides, someone who embezzles money likely cheats on his taxes because not doing so would likely get him caught for his initial crime. A drug dealer who kills someone (who robbed them) doesn't do it because they are unable to report a crack robbery to the police, they most likely do so in a retaliatory manner, to seek revenge, not justice...because after all, the person who is dealing drugs certainly can't be too concerned about crime in his neighborhood, just worried that he was the victim.

Again, you can't legalize one crime in order to curb another. If someone, in the act of murdering a person, sees a person getting raped across the street, there is zero chance they call the police to report that crime, because doing so would incriminate them in the murder they just committed. However, if that same scenario unfolded but murder was legal, is there a greater chance that the person who just strangled someone to death would call the police? Probably, because most law abiding citizen do that sort of thing.

Legalizing a criminal activity doesn't change a person's personality or proclivity to disobey the law just because they are no longer labeled a criminal.

Regards