80
5 votes
Jul 10, 2015

Marijuana should be made legal because it is less harmful than alcohol. Regulation should be similar to how tobacco and alcohol regulation works: high tax, detailed records, and ID checks.

Harder drugs such as like cocaine, heroin, and meth because of the extremely high health risks. These risks include the staggering addiction rates and likelihood of overdose. Additionally, many of the unfortunate souls who abuse these hard drugs make themselves burdens on society. Oftentimes, use of the drugs becomes expensive, destabilizes the users who are more likely to be fired from their jobs, and forces them to turn to government entitlements or to mooch off of family and friends.

However, the users of hard drugs should not be seen as criminals of a similar caliber of burglars or embezzlers. Those who become addicted to drugs are victims and sending them to jail for years would only serve to exacerbate the issue by forcing them to turn to crime, because who wants to hire a convict? Instead, treatment options should be open to the users, similar to how people convicted of assault may have to attend anger-management classes.

Reply to this opinion
subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
0
linked reply
0 votes,
Jul 10, 2015

Yes legalize pot. No I.D. checks except for age. No higher taxes. That's the only reason they will legalize it. Again the Constitution is the issue. So it is legal, and this is a police state. Yep, we got 50 of them. Harder drugs should be a concern for mental and physical reasons. There has to be an answer "not jail", but I don't have it. Understanding that you can't fight addiction by dehumanizing people might help. Even though the the last three presidents mooched off us, and were self admitted users, we didn't judge them about drugs. We just judge people that are convenient. The last,' However', paragraph is a good start. Wish I could add to it, but as I said, It is above my knowledge of how or what would actually work.

subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
100
main reply
2 votes,
Jul 10, 2015

I agree and decriminalizing them or sen legalizing them and allowing doctors to prescribe them to wean patients off would be helpful, don't make these ppl criminals, make them patients

subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
100
main reply
1 vote,
Jul 10, 2015

"Harder drugs such as like cocaine, heroin, and meth because of the extremely high health risks."

But where do you draw the line?

"However, the users of hard drugs should not be seen as criminals of a similar caliber of burglars or embezzlers.Those who become addicted to drugs are victims and sending them to jail for years would only serve to exacerbate the issue by forcing them to turn to crime, because who wants to hire a convict?"

Agree that they should not be on that level of culpability, but because it is their own bodies they are damaging. You could also say, and criminal legal theory says that taking a drug is a free, informed choice, so anything that comes as a result remains the fault of the person taking it. (obviously in cases where it has been involuntarily taken, it is different.) I do agree that sending them to jail for years would only serve to exacerbate the issue, but I cannot see a valid solution to such a harmful problem which respects the individual freedom, yet stops the harm being caused.

subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
100
1 vote,
Jul 10, 2015

I'd draw the line by using evidence. What is the harm caused by these drugs? I'm talking about the pharmacology here, so what does this do physically and mentally to a range of users? By studying this we'd also need to consider the current climate, and wonder how much of this harm is due to criminalisation of the substances? Hypothetically speaking, would harm caused by heroin be on a par with alcohol if it were regulated the same was as alcohol? What is the cost to society of de-criminalising substances, and does this cost justify removing personal liberty? At a simple level, if x drug was highly-dissociative and led to violent episodes in all users, we'd have a pretty case for criminalising this. If incidences of violence were higher among users and the general population, but still a tiny minority, the case would be less clear. We don't ban alcohol, yet it's implicated in plenty of criminal and/or negligent actions. The main thing is to remove morals from the making of laws and policies.

subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
100
main reply
1 vote,
Jul 10, 2015

I agree with the thought that pot should be legalized. It is most certainly less harmful than booze. But while alcohol wears off within a few measurable hours, the effects of pot can last much longer and have long term effects on an individual's mind. It can turn a person in to a lazy bag of bones. I think the major fear of legalizing pot is that so many people will become useless because of it. For a while I smoked pot and it definitely had some long term effects that made me in to a lazy slob. I can't say for certain that these fear are even true, regardless of whether or not they would even play out in a legalization scenario, but pot does have more of a mental impact than alcohol.

subscribe
Challenge someone to answer this opinion:
Invite an OpiWiki user:
OR
Invite your friend via email:
OR
Share it: