What would happen if all drugs were legalized?

[Leo Gura]

Actualized Cookies coming to the Actualized Store soon

[BuddhistLover]

@Leo Gura Lol, that's how you deal with bullies, buy them cookies. Did you ever deal with bullies growing up? Or did you just get into big debates with everyone in class proving that you were right? 

[thepixelmonk]

6 hours ago, Blackhawk said:

And in those countries it's also legal to sell and buy any drugs? I don't think so. So no, I'm not wrong.

Yes, you are. I asked for any empirical data whatsoever and you come back with... nothing. Until you can back your statement up with literally any piece of data, you are wrong.

 

4 hours ago, Devin said:

He said it would be, not that it is in those countries, there are obviously different variables elsewhere, I don't agree with him but who wants to live in an echo chamber, don't jump down his throat, he wasn't being disrespectful, give him a chance to explain first. Statistics don't mean sh!t sometimes

Nothing is the end-all-be-all, but if you're going to go against every bit of data and statistics we have, you better, as you say, be able to back it up with something. And as we can see, we still have... nothing.

Edited July 20, 2022 by thepixelmonk

[zurew]

4 hours ago, Devin said:

Guess there's no point in ever discussing anything like this ever then huh? Little Timmy in Portugal didn't start shooting up therefore open the flood gates.

There is value in discussing stuff like this, of course. But its really hard to argue, when all empirical data is pointing in one direction. Its a factual disagreement, so it can only be settled by using outside sources.

I had my own views on this topic, but i had to change my mind, because my views were hinging upon a lot of assumpsions, that were not backed up by any data or studies. 

When i read these studies i was like: "fuck it, i have different views on this, but if it works, then it works".

4 hours ago, Devin said:

Statistics don't mean sh!t sometimes

When it comes to social issues, the most valuable thing you can do is to collect a lot of data and try to make sense of these issues using that data. 

[Blackhawk]

1 hour ago, thepixelmonk said:

Yes, you are. I asked for any empirical data whatsoever and you come back with... nothing. Until you can back your statement up with literally any piece of data, you are wrong.

You are insane if you think that fully legalizing selling, buying and use of all drugs would lead to good things.

I don't need any data for that, because I can use my brain to understand it.

You are like "where is the data which proves that drinking lava is a bad thing?"

I say: there is no data, because no one (except you, apparently) would be so insane and drink lava in the first place.

[ZenAlex]

They should not be legalized, just decriminalized. 

Let people organise themselves through sites like Silk road that give them a greater chance of safety. No guarantee, but greater chance.

[something_else]

2 hours ago, Blackhawk said:

You are insane if you think that fully legalizing selling, buying and use of all drugs would lead to good things.

Decriminalization of all drugs has been shown to be extremely positive in various countries. You shouldn't go to prison because you ended up addicted to heroin or coke.

Nor should you go to prison for being found with a couple tabs of acid in your pocket.

It's a nuanced issue, and your initial response of "no this is a fucking shit idea" is probably what riled up that dude. It's not a simple issue with an easy answer.

Most people here are particularly concerned with psychedelics anyway, since many of us have had such positive effects. I don't think anyone is advocating for the legalization of buying some heroin in your local corner store. 

Most common psychedelics are non-addictive and non-toxic. The dangers come from misusing them, or from the substance not being what it was advertised as. 

My argument would be that legalizing psychedelics to a degree would essentially fix both issues, by introducing regulation/awareness/standards for use. Basically preventing it from being sold as something it's not and preventing people who are likely to have intense negative reactions from taking them.

[Carl-Richard]

7 hours ago, something_else said:

Most people here are particularly concerned with psychedelics anyway, since many of us have had such positive effects. I don't think anyone is advocating for the legalization of buying some heroin in your local corner store. 

Should we abolish clean needle rooms? https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/09/07/645609248/whats-the-evidence-that-supervised-drug-injection-sites-save-lives

The reasoning there is that people are inevitably going to shoot up, so we might as make it as safe as possible. Legalization and regulation has a similiar reasoning behind it. It's possible to make drugs available for purchase with heavy regulation like tobacco products in some countries which disincentivizes use: no advertising, all brands have the same boring packaging, have graphic health warnings on them, and they're completely hidden from view. In Norway, it's possible to grow up without knowing how to legally buy tobacco.

https://norwaytoday.info/news/standardized-tobacco-containers-norway/

I could imagine other types of regulations like a national customer registry which tracks all your drug purchases and limits the amounts you can buy from any store at one time or over a certain period. Say if you were to max out your amount of heroin and you say that it's not enough, you could for example be offered a methadone treatment program or buy some weaker opiate substitute.

[integral]

10 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Why do you have this weird obsession with drugging people? ? I'll stay far the hell away from you ?

LMFAOO dont make me put a little something in that fish bread, youll be sure to come around.

Jokes aside I was explaining what a business minded person would do with out regulations. I wouldn't scheme to addict people. Not that we already aren't doing that legally with msg.

Imagine dumping millions of litters of psychedelics into the ocean like they did with mercury in unregulated countries. We would be ingesting some amount of it with everything we eat.

How twisted can a green business get? If my arrogance was a few notches higher i could see myself believing i know what's best for the entire world and push a twisted green business agenda. 

Edited July 20, 2022 by integral

[Blackhawk]

5 hours ago, something_else said:

Decriminalization of all drugs has been shown to be extremely positive in various countries. You shouldn't go to prison because you ended up addicted to heroin or coke.

Nor should you go to prison for being found with a couple tabs of acid in your pocket.

It's a nuanced issue, and your initial response of "no this is a fucking shit idea" is probably what riled up that dude. It's not a simple issue with an easy answer.

Most people here are particularly concerned with psychedelics anyway, since many of us have had such positive effects. I don't think anyone is advocating for the legalization of buying some heroin in your local corner store. 

Most common psychedelics are non-addictive and non-toxic. The dangers come from misusing them, or from the substance not being what it was advertised as. 

My argument would be that legalizing psychedelics to a degree would essentially fix both issues, by introducing regulation/awareness/standards for use. Basically preventing it from being sold as something it's not and preventing people who are likely to have intense negative reactions from taking them.

This is what the op said:

 

"What would happen if all drugs were legalized?

How would it play out?"

 

But you turn it into something different.

Edited July 20, 2022 by Blackhawk

[something_else]

1 hour ago, Blackhawk said:

This is what the op said:

 

"What would happen if all drugs were legalized?

How would it play out?"

 

But you turn it into something different.

Decriminalization is absolutely under the scope of a thread about drug legalization. At least if you want to have any kind of nuanced discussion anyway

The last three paragraphs of my post were just my general opinion on the issue and weren't really a response to you anyway, that wasn't so clear, sorry.

 

[something_else]

4 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Should we abolish clean needle rooms?

No, if you are an addict you should be treated as a medical patient and not a criminal

[Carl-Richard]

2 hours ago, something_else said:

No, if you are an addict you should be treated as a medical patient and not a criminal

Same with alcoholics, but no need to remove liquor stores. The main problems I see for legalization and regulation of hard drugs is how to ease the culture into it with the least possible friction. There will inevitably be problems in that process, just like with anything (look at collective electric scooters). But once that process is over, we'll be at roughly the same place as alcohol today. We already know alcohol kills millions each year, and it's considered the most harmful drug on most metrics, but it's still legal and regulated, because that is the least brain dead solution.

[Devin]

17 hours ago, Blackhawk said:

You are insane if you think that fully legalizing selling, buying and use of all drugs would lead to good things.

I don't need any data for that, because I can use my brain to understand it.

You are like "where is the data which proves that drinking lava is a bad thing?"

I say: there is no data, because no one (except you, apparently) would be so insane and drink lava in the first place.

Do you think the war on drugs has any negative repercussions?

Edited July 21, 2022 by Devin

[Carl-Richard]

15 minutes ago, Devin said:

Do you think the war on drugs has any negative repercussions?

1. Complete corruption of society.
2. Complete corruption of society.

[Devin]

25 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

1. Complete corruption of society.
2. Complete corruption of society.

I think I agree, but would you elaborate?

There are many reasons for me but most people especially non poor get away with using drugs, this is not good if it is illegal, what does it communicate about law to everyone? It means we're corrupt, so then what's the point of laws? To be used selectively as a weapon, dishonestly, unethically.

[Carl-Richard]

49 minutes ago, Devin said:

I think I agree, but would you elaborate?

It's simply the case that this level of wide-scale abuse of society's citizens through mass incarceration and willfully fueling a multi-trillion dollar criminal underworld, merely for trying (and failing miserably) to control something that is generally less harmful than the most common legal drug (alcohol), is obviously just complete and utter madness. People will look back at drug prohibition the way we look back at slavery today.

The reason people are vary about it is because of fear, ignorance and stigma. If you have any experience with so-called hard drugs or know anything about pharmacology, it's patently obvious that drug prohibition makes zero sense. That said, I'm probably the most anti-drug person you can find. This is not a moral crusade. This about the health of society as a system. The specifics of legalization (e.g. what is sensible and safe) is a regulation problem, which will sort itself out just like it did with alcohol after the prohibition era.

[Devin]

13 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

It's simply the case that this level of wide-scale abuse of society's citizens through mass incarceration and willfully fueling a multi-trillion dollar criminal underworld, merely for trying (and failing miserably) to control something that is generally less harmful than the most common legal drug (alcohol), is obviously just complete and utter madness. People will look back at drug prohibition the way we look back at slavery today.

The reason people are vary about it is because of fear, ignorance and stigma. If you have any experience with so-called hard drugs or know anything about pharmacology, it's patently obvious that drug prohibition makes zero sense. That said, I'm probably the most anti-drug person you can find. This is not a moral crusade. This about the health of society as a system. The specifics of legalization (e.g. what is sensible and safe) is a regulation problem, which will sort itself out just like it did with alcohol after the prohibition era.

I think you mentioned alcohol regulation before, that goes right over my head, I see no restriction on alcohol, not even for kids, sure speed bumps but it was as available as lemonade when I was a kid 15 years ago. Some kids drank at school.

Edited July 21, 2022 by Devin

[thepixelmonk]

19 hours ago, Blackhawk said:

You are insane if you think that fully legalizing selling, buying and use of all drugs would lead to good things.

I don't need any data for that, because I can use my brain to understand it.

You are like "where is the data which proves that drinking lava is a bad thing?"

I say: there is no data, because no one (except you, apparently) would be so insane and drink lava in the first place.

LMAO don't need any data. Just proving you add absolutely nothing to the discussion. Lava metaphor is completely ridiculous and just further shows you have absolutely no understanding of why decriminalization has shown such positive results.

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, Devin said:

I think you mentioned alcohol regulation before, that goes right over my head, I see no restriction on alcohol, not even for kids, sure speed bumps but it was as available as lemonade when I was a kid 15 years ago. Some kids drank at school.

When I say regulation, I'm not really talking about age limits for purchasing, or that this will have some kind of magical effect on deterring people from underaged drug use. That will happen anyway, prohibition or no prohibition. I'm mainly just talking about how drugs should literally be sold.