War on Drugs, and Drug Prohibition. Opinions?

Hey guys,

Figured I'd make this thread as a spin-off of the thread started about Romney and the medical marijuana question. Figured it would be better to start a new thread about it to discuss the issues. So here's some starting questions:

-Is the War on Drugs effective? If not, can it be fixed?

-If you are for legalization, is it solely for marijuana, some drugs, or all? Why?

-If you are for prohibition, is it for all drugs AND tobacco/alcohol, all drugs besides those two, or all drugs besides marijuana, tobacco, and alcohol? Why?

 

The War on Drugs failed a long time ago. People have been doing drugs (legal/illegal) for centuries. Why would things change? If your going to do drugs, you will, regardless of there legal status. The emphasis should be on harm minimization, educating people about the effects of drugs, how to deal with things in certain situations, etc, but not sensationalizing it.

 

Of course it's effective. Effective in keeping drug prices high & millions of people in prison.

If it was truly to protect society, tobacco and alcohol would be illegal too.

 

They irony is that you would have to be stoned to think the was on drugs is working.

 

Unfortunately, the government's second largest business is dictating morality. One would have to wonder what American prosperity and productivity would be if all of the bureaucrats actually produced something of value and stimulated the economy, instead of absorbing the tax grab in wages to chase paper tigers.

 

Even then you would still be in denial.

 

As far as legalization, I encourage it immediately for marijuana. It's less harmful and addictive than almost any drug, including the two legal ones, and even less addictive than stuff you don't think about, such as caffeine. The original prohibition was founded on racism against Mexicans, and support from special interest groups like DuPont, plus a lot of just ignorant, false studies and accusations like Reefer Madness.

As far as other drugs, I think the War on Drugs has failed also, but I'm not sure I support a complete legalization. I tend to lean towards legalization than prohibition though, for a number of reasons: the libertarian view on the issue, and the fact that bureaucracy and legislation can't seem to fix a social ill, for starters. I need to look into this aspect of legalization a bit more to firmly take a side.

 

It's not effective and I wouldn't be happier if it was. It's a bad idea. It shouldn't be fixed, it should be abandoned.

I am for full legalization of all drugs, from aspirin to viagra to xanax to crack cocaine.

n/a

 

Yay! It's cost $400 billion since the 70s. It would be nice to have that money so we can invade Iran!

 

I dunno man, nuking them would be a lot cheaper.

Then I could use the money for some really good weed...

 

Hell you could start your own grow room!

 

Looking at the blunt he is smoking, he probably already is

 

The war on drugs is only successful in glorifying a subculture of morons, creating millionaires out of thugs, and the general dumbing down of our youth. Legalize them and folks would look at someone doing them as they would now at someone sticking his head inside a paper bag drenched with glue.

How many lives wasted? And I mean on both sides.

 

As George Best said, "I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered."

It's all about quality of life man, and quality of life is defined by the person living it.

 

I can't believe we don't have any pro-criminalization/pro-War on drugs people posting. Come on guys, let's debate it!

 

That's true to an extent but tobacco is hardly a threat to anyone besides the actual user (if smoked with respect) one the other hand meth is dangerous to not only the user but to everyone that comes into contact with him.

@omgitsfletch
I'm all for anyone that wants to fuck their own body up, it's when it affects others that a drug should be banned.

 

That's like the tired old argument of "guns kill people". No, it is people who kill people. Meth doesn't hurt other people, people on meth who can't control themselves hurt other people.

Banning meth in return does not solve the problem, as people will still use meth, and people will still hurt other people. Society should without a doubt go after those who lose control and punish them for their actions, but banning something on the POSSIBILITY it will cause something else just doesn't work very well in the true interests of serving justice.

 

It also depends on where people make meth if its in a residential house it effects everyone in that house or apartment complex because of how the chemicals spread when they are mixed.

 

Also I think that the war on Drugs has been a failure partly because its hard to fight the supply of it as along as there is the demand for it.

 

1. This issue is solved with legalization. If there is no black market for drugs, prices drop as industry takes hold, and no one bothers to make meth in their basement anymore. The demand isn't there when they can get the same, if not better quality stuff for cheaper in a store. You don't see too many people making moonshine in their bathtubs nowadays, and for good reason; industry beats out the individual.

2. Yes, and this is why it will never work. There is always going to be a huge portion of the population who will use drugs. This isn't just America, almost every culture of the world, past and present, has its vices. With legalization, you can tax it and make millions of dollars, you make room in prisons for actual violent dangerous criminals, you cut a lot of the spending for the justice and prison system that houses all these drug offenders, among other things. The demand is there, and no amount of legislation and jail time is going to change that. We need a new approach.