Legalisation

[IchabodPlain]

I still don't understand that in a country that loves to bandy about the word "freedom" that the argument that anti-drug laws represent an infringement on personal liberty hasn't found more support.

After all, we're talking about the right to control our own minds and bodies here - is there something more fundamental to "freedom" than that?

Anyway, I like these guys: http://www.cognitiveliberty.org/

We are talking about the same country that amended its own constitution to ban alcohol less than a century ago, right?

The same country that only gave every citizen the right to vote less than sixty years ago, right?

Honestly, it's a difficult issue. One which has support in some states (California, Alaska) and doesn't in others (Florida, Louisiana). Of course, all of what we're talking about would have to take place on the federal level. There is probably a decent amount of national support for legalizing/decriminalizing cannabis (don't have stats handy for that). But for as much as we are a freedom loving country, we are also a law & order country. Difficult balance.

 

[Praktik]

Each drug should stand or fall on its own merits.

Furthermore, I don't even like the piggyback that some have taken in regards to possible medicinal properties of cannabis as a reason to legalize it for the general public. It's the equivalent of saying "morphine helps people with pain, so it should be legalized for general use." Absolutely ridiculous.

I'm not sure that's a fair criticism and it's also maybe a bit of conflict to suggest that each drug should rise and fall on its own merits and then extend an analogy to morphine, whose "merits" are surely way different than those of marijuana.

I do come across a lot of talk about how medical marijuana is a "trojan horse" for eventual legalization, mostly from prohibitionists hoping to argue a slippery slope.

And then I come across more reasonable people like yourself that say variations of what you had said: might as well just come out for legalization straight up instead of couching it in medical marijuana. Thing is, I'm not entirely sure where that criticism is rooted. Most legalization advocates would be happy to tell you the list of reasons why it should be legal for non-medecinal recreational use and don't hide behind anything. Only one item on these lists might be medecinal marijuana - speaking personally, I think it should be legalized for a host of other reasons. I have rarely - if ever - come across someone who said "because of medical marijuana it should be legal for non-medicinal purposes". But I have come across arguments rooted in personal freedom, opportunity cost/economics, justice system burdens, crime syndicate issues. Contextually, and to help present the relatively benign effects of the drug, they might mention how it provides relief to sick people. Rarely is this the linchpin of a full-legalization argument.

You might find some ardent medical marijuana advocates who actually don't want to talk much about legalization for recreational purposes because it clouds the moral clarity of their position and opens them up to the oft-repeated "trojan horse" claims. The sad fact is that social stigma and the socio-cultural environment, especially at elite levels, makes any association with the recreational-legalization crowd a bit of a problem for them. This is more an artifact of the current political culture, than it is of some hidden agenda, or faulty logic as you allege.

 

[Peephole]

One thing's certain, decriminalization leads to a decrease in drug use, deaths from overdoses and HIV infections:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=portugal-drug-decriminalization
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html

 

[WildCat]

Well it would just shift things around a bit. As there is an underground trade in oxycontin, im sure some would still sell for the convenience factor (oh hes right on the corner) and cause well, thats what they're used to doing. Will take a while for people to change tracks.

But yes, would be a huge hit to organized crime. Thing is, there's still plenty of other areas to earn money that street gangs will use:

- prostitution
- people smuggling
- extortion and protection rackets
- gambling
- gun running

They wont go away - they'll still have plenty of places to earn a buck, and the appeal to inner city kids looking for a way to make a buck in places where legal means to do so are scarce will still find their way to the gangs.

Not nearly as much money in those alternatives. And gambling is legal in most places now, within a short drive for most people.