War on Drugs

christagious

Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2007
Messages
947
How will ending the war on drugs and legalizing them be better for the country? I haven't looked into the issue much, but I do know that one benefit will be saving money by not cracking down on dope dealers, etc.

But how will it help people in the ghetto? If anything, they will be encouraged to smoke more crack because they don't have to worry about getting busted. It'll also help the street pharmacists because they'll be able to legally peddle their wares.


How is legalization the better option?
 
How will ending the war on drugs and legalizing them be better for the country? I haven't looked into the issue much, but I do know that one benefit will be saving money by not cracking down on dope dealers, etc.

But how will it help people in the ghetto? If anything, they will be encouraged to smoke more crack because they don't have to worry about getting busted. It'll also help the street pharmacists because they'll be able to legally peddle their wares.


How is legalization the better option?

Leaving regulation up to the states, not making it a federal issue, not filling state prisons with non-violent drug users, not wasting money on it.
 
How is legalization the better option?

Good for you that you are asking this question.

The answer, for me, is not really about who it is better for. Drug (de)regulation is all about individual freedom.

Would you like someone from the government forcing you on a diet? Or telling you that you cannot eat at McDonald's because it is unhealthy?

Probably not. Some people enjoy drugs, others are addicted, but what right do we have to forbid drugs across the board? What right? None.

Live And Let Live, my friend.

Once you start researching the war on drugs you will find that it has a shipload of problems. Prohibition
...pushes up prices -> leads to more crime amongst addicts
...makes quality control is impossible -> higher risk of overdose
...make the drug market underground -> can't be taxed
etc.
The list goes on a on. If in the end you think "well, at least it reduces consumption"... you are wrong.
 
LEAP and DEA

Go out and Google "LEAP" - Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. Their site has videos and information about this issue.

For the other side, go to the DEA site - Drug Enforcement Agency. There is a lot of information there.

Best to become totally informed before making your decision...
 
Illegality drives the price up, which in turn creates crime and prostitution. It's also the primary funding of gangs. If it were legal, it would gravitate to more private locations, and there would be fewer street dealers. Users would take fewer unnecessary health risks, like needle exchange and tainted product.

Cops could chase real crime. Particularly in the city, where they're absolutely swamped.

People who use hard drugs like heroin and crack are a lot like you, and at some point most will want to quit. The system is set up to keep it secret and shameful, like they're criminals rather than sick people. Our penitentiaries are horrible and bursting at the seams.

Also, some drugs (marijuana) are healthier and less addictive than cigarettes or alcohol. Science and reason should be determining these laws, not federal lobbyists.

That's my argument for total legalization, but Ron Paul wouldn't legalize drugs. He'd delegate it to the states.
 
How will ending the war on drugs and legalizing them be better for the country? I haven't looked into the issue much, but I do know that one benefit will be saving money by not cracking down on dope dealers, etc.

But how will it help people in the ghetto? If anything, they will be encouraged to smoke more crack because they don't have to worry about getting busted. It'll also help the street pharmacists because they'll be able to legally peddle their wares.


How is legalization the better option?

Easy, once drugs are legalized, all the drug dealers simply go out of business.
 
Could it also be argued that it would help the free market?

I'm really surprised that the tobacco companies haven't lobbied to legalize marijuana. They could make a killing off of it. Why hasn't Marlboro tried to make it legal to sell Marijuana 100's at the local Speedway?
 
Let me put it simply. How many drive by shootings do you hear of when one Liquior store shoots up another over turf? Yet this happened one time in our history during Prohibition. Not any more why?

Violence occurs in the world of black markets because they don't have access to courts so they have to establish thier own justice system. Get rid of the black markets by ending prohibition and you end all of the gang related violence.

If you made drugs, guns, gambling, and prostitution legal you would eliminate all organized crime.
 
Just look at the prohibition of alcohol as a perfect example. It didn't work.. The drug war creates more problems and takes more human lives. Sure drugs are bad but people will do drugs regardless. The drug war just adds to the problems. Take Marijuana for example, a drug that is nowhere near as harmful as alcohol or cigarettes and also has many known medical benefits. There is not one documented death that resulted from using the drug but now because of the drug war people are dying over it. As in drug deals gone bad or drug busts that turn into gunfights. If it were legal it would be similar to how tobacco is handled and innocent people wouldn't die over a plant that has been here longer than human life itself.. Also I could have gotten practically any drug imaginable since 6th grade (not saying I did) but it was easily available. Drug deals were always going down in classrooms, bathrooms, and even the lunchroom. Making them legal would take most drugs from being sold on the streets and harder to get a hold of. I am 20 years old now and can say that nothing has changed and illegal drugs are more readily available than alcohol and alcohol is legal. So damn what a great job the war on drugs has done so far.....
 
Last edited:
Just look at the prohibition of alcohol as a perfect example. It didn't work.. The drug war creates more problems and more human lives. Sure drugs are bad but people will do drugs regardless. The drug war just adds to the problems. Take Marijuana for example, a drug that is nowhere near as harmful as alcohol or cigarettes and also has many known medical benefits. There is not one documented death that resulted from using the drug but now because of the drug war people are dying over it. As in drug deals gone bad or drug busts that turn into gunfights. If it were legal it would be similar to how tobacco is handled and innocent people wouldn't die over a plant that has been here longer than human life itself.. Also I could have gotten practically any drug imaginable since 6th grade (not saying I did) but it was easily available. Drug deals were always going down in classrooms, bathrooms, and even the lunchroom. Making them legal would take most drugs from being sold on the streets and harder to get a hold of. I am 20 years old now and can say that nothing has changed and illegal drugs are more readily available than alcohol and alcohol is legal. So damn what a great job the war on drugs has done so far.....


You are so right!! When i was in highschool it was much more easy to get a bag of weed than a six pack of Beer!!!
 
More people die from the health affects of cheeseburgers than of all illegal drugs, why isn't there a war against fatty foods?
 
More people die from the health affects of cheeseburgers than of all illegal drugs, why isn't there a war against fatty foods?

Thank you for bringing in the cheeseburger analogy. I use this one constantly.

Obesity is just as dangerous as a drug addiction. Yet we don't outlaw cheetos, mcdonalds, fries, cookies, or soda, do we?

No. No politician would ever do that. It would not get him re-elected.

Drug laws have nothing to do with safety and everything to do with politicans getting elected based on propogating a war against taboo chemicals.

Look at it this way, I can go to the store and buy a liter of antifreeze, come home and down a glass, then die. There are literally thousands of chemicals more dangerous than marijuana, cocaine, heroin, or any other mind-altering chemical you can name.

But the government says, hey, these dangerous chemicals over here, they're okay. But those ones over there, not happening. Danger is clearly not the issue.

We refuse to drink antifreeze not because of its legal status, but because biologists, chemists, and common knowledge tells us it's unsafe for consumption. By the same token, legalization of drugs would not create a flood of newcomers like the "slippery slope" people will have you believe.

People realize the risks involved with drugs. There is a tendency for addiction and bodily harm. People would make decisions and take into account these risks before using, just like alcohol, tobacco, or a Big Mac. But it should never be the government's responsibility to make a personal decision for everyone.

Information and education are far better methods of promoting safety than coersion via the DEA.

And as far as drug addictions go, do we really believe that politicians and judges can do a better job at rehabilitating a person than loving family and caring friends?

To answer the question at hand, though, Ron Paul could only decriminalize drugs at the federal level. If a state wanted to continue enforcing drug laws, so be it. But states that would like to decriminalize drugs would be free to do so without the federal government rearing its ugly hand.
 
Benefits of Marijuana/all drug decriminalization for non-minors.

1. If you don't prosecute non-violent crime more resource are spent on violent crimes.
2. Revenue from the sale and taxation eases tax burden.
3. Increased state revenue from not having to pay to prosecute "offenders" can go to schools.
4. Drop in price makes addicts not have to steal and kill to support the habit as much.
5. You can give these people help instead of treating them as criminals.
 
Illegality drives the price up, which in turn creates crime and prostitution. It's also the primary funding of gangs. If it were legal, it would gravitate to more private locations, and there would be fewer street dealers. Users would take fewer unnecessary health risks, like needle exchange and tainted product.

Cops could chase real crime. Particularly in the city, where they're absolutely swamped.

People who use hard drugs like heroin and crack are a lot like you, and at some point most will want to quit. The system is set up to keep it secret and shameful, like they're criminals rather than sick people. Our penitentiaries are horrible and bursting at the seams.

Also, some drugs (marijuana) are healthier and less addictive than cigarettes or alcohol. Science and reason should be determining these laws, not federal lobbyists.

That's my argument for total legalization, but Ron Paul wouldn't legalize drugs. He'd delegate it to the states.


Agreed. The war on drugs also creates much violent crime as did alcohol prohibition do to an underground market protecting obscene profits and territorial fights.
 
Back
Top