Devin

What would happen if all drugs were legalized?

74 posts in this topic

How would it play out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Devin

2 minutes ago, Devin said:

How would it play out?

   I would imagine chaotic at first, but other time regulations would be passed, enforced, and soon enough society could manage teaching the theory and safe practices of psychedelics, assuming you mean psychedelics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Portugal and Spain have decriminalized all drugs. Their results have been really healthy.

There is a problem if drugs are legalized to the point where capitalists can shamelessly market them. That is not a good thing. I feel like weed is way overmarketed nowadays.


You are God. You are Truth. You are Love. You are Infinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disaster in every imaginable way.

They aren't illegal just because it's fun to make things illegal. They are illegal for a very good reason.

But of course all the drug lovers will disagree. They want easy access to their drugs.

Edited by Blackhawk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Devin said:

How would it play out?


Like many addictions, drugs are often taken to fill a void, and loneliness is a common void. By reducing the stigma and social outcasting that goes on less people stay addicted to drugs. The worst thing you can do if you want someone off drugs is cut them off from human contact or label them as different, unwanted, criminals etc.

With a lot less people on criminal records, so they can if they want to improve their lives.

With a lot less stigma for being associated with rehab, my brother has been fired a few times for having a drug-related past, or visiting the clinic that allows him smaller doses of a blocker to keep him off drugs. Guess what that does, puts him in a place mentally that its easier to take drugs. This happened as his last job too, and he's close to 40 now so its ever present. Thankfully he bounced back fairly fast this time.

There would be a small upturn in drug use, that's proven out over the countries that have legalized it.

We should mention that just decriminalizing it and removing some of the stigma associated with drug taking is a great stepfoward. In not only researching them in depth for the drawbacks/benfits but also not isolating drug users. If something is honest and open that generates trust, at the moment with the lack of transparency people don't trust those telling them certain substances are bad for them, because 1) Not enough research is being done publicly, 2) All substances get tarred with the same brush and 3) Well because its 'cool' for kids to rebel against authority and 4) An entire subculture separate from society arises in drug users that are isolated from that society. - All of these would be integrated and removed if drugs were publicly researched in more detail and de-criminalized or socially more acceptable.

We won't see as many people living two lives. I can tell you the worst thing about living with an addict is that they lie ALL THE TIME. Everything is in secrecy everything is considered bad/wrong so they can't talk about it. It shapes their entire persona around everything. This leads to a lot of trauma for the family, because you are constantly gaslighted in every interaction, and you can barely talk to anyone outside the family about it. Aside from them stealing or seeing your brother's head beaten in with a baseball bat because he couldn't get enough money together for example, or being present but too weak to stop your brother ending up in hospital and living with that guilt. 

The whole way we look at this needs to be untangled from an unhelpful knot. Drugs need to carry no criminal convictions because its the person's own body they are abusing if they do so. Those people selling heroin, meth etc need to be in jail for life, because that's what they take from others. When it comes to weed or DMT for example, its ridiculous to even put them in the same sentence, let alone line of thinking.

It'd also be a hit to organized crime which is never a bad thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Blackhawk said:

Disaster in every imaginable way.

They aren't illegal just because it's fun to make things illegal. They are illegal for a very good reason.

But of course all the drug lovers will disagree. They want easy access to their drugs.

In the long run?

I don't do drugs, and not because they're illegal.

Why are they illegal? I think just like someone being a helicopter parent, if you don't allow free will you retard people into staying in a prepubescent mindset of not thinking for themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Devin

1 hour ago, Devin said:

In the long run?

I don't do drugs, and not because they're illegal.

Why are they illegal? I think just like someone being a helicopter parent, if you don't allow free will you retard people into staying in a prepubescent mindset of not thinking for themselves.

   What do you mean when you say drugs? Do you mean hard core drugs like cocaine and heroin, or psychedelics like psilocybin mushrooms? Do you mean synthetic drugs, like methamphetamine or LSD?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Devin

   What do you mean when you say drugs? Do you mean hard core drugs like cocaine and heroin, or psychedelics like psilocybin mushrooms? Do you mean synthetic drugs, like methamphetamine or LSD?

All drugs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an article on this issue :https://drugpolicy.org/issues/drug-decriminalization

Overall there are strong arguments in favour of decriminalization.

Quote

A common fear is that decriminalizing drugs would lead to more drug dependency and crime. There is no indication this is true. Data from the U.S. and around the world suggest that treating problematic drug use as a health issue, instead of a criminal one, is a more successful model for keeping communities healthy and safe.

Quote

Portugal decriminalized drug possession in 2001. More than a decade later, drug use has remained about the same – but arrests, incarceration, disease, overdose and other harms are all down:

  • Portugal’s drug use rates remain below the European average and far lower than rates of drug use in the U.S.
  • Between 1998 and 2011, the number of people in drug treatment increased by more than 60%.
  • The number of new HIV diagnoses dropped dramatically – from 1,575 cases in 2000 to 78 cases in 2013 – and the number of new AIDS cases decreased from 626 in 2000 to 74 cases in 2013.
  • Drug overdose fatalities also dropped from about 80 in 2001 to just 16 in 2012.
  • The number of people arrested and sent to criminal courts for drug offenses annually declined by more than 60% following decriminalization.
  • The percentage of people behind bars in Portugal for drug law violations also decreased dramatically, from 44% in 1999 to 24% in 2013.

 

Here is a different article on this topic: https://www.tpoftampa.com/latest-on-the-decriminalization-of-drugs/

Quote

Statistics from countries that have reduced or abolished criminal penalties for drug possession underscore three important findings:

  • The rate of drug use or crime did not increase
  • The rate of addiction, overdoses, and HIV/AIDS sharply decreased
  • More people entered drug treatment programs
Quote

Decriminalization would have a positive financial impact:

Imprisoning people for drug-related crimes costs billions of dollars each year. For example, Oregon spent about $375 million dollars in 2016 to arrest, prosecute and imprison drug offenders. Drug decriminalization will allow the state to use a portion of the money saved to fund new drug prevention and treatment centers.

 

Three Lessons the Netherlands Learned After Decades of Evolving Its Drug Policy:

https://drugpolicy.org/blog/america-take-note-three-lessons-holland-learned-after-decades-evolving-its-drug-policy

Quote

Conclusions:

  •  Decriminalization doesn’t increase drug use.
  • You can successfully separate drug markets
  • Commitment to public health-driven drug policy contributes to reduction of drug-related harm.

 

Edited by zurew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@zurew

45 minutes ago, zurew said:

Here is an article on this issue :https://drugpolicy.org/issues/drug-decriminalization

Overall there are strong arguments in favour of decriminalization.

 

Here is a different article on this topic: https://www.tpoftampa.com/latest-on-the-decriminalization-of-drugs/

 

Three Lessons the Netherlands Learned After Decades of Evolving Its Drug Policy:

https://drugpolicy.org/blog/america-take-note-three-lessons-holland-learned-after-decades-evolving-its-drug-policy

 

   That's amazing, to think decriminalization of drugs would have such positive effects.

   I guess we all should reduce or abolish all criminalization, and see what happens. So counter intuitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We would have different alternatives to alcohol.


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Blackhawk They're illegal because it's the easiest solution, not necessarily because it's the best one. At least not in the long run. The problem is that the systemic root issues, that cause the drug epidemic to begin with, never get addressed. A healthy person wouldn't do drugs, not because they're illegal, but because they aren't good for you. So when people are talking about "legalizing" drugs, they're not necessarily talking about "making sure that little Timmy can get his daily shot of heroin from the local supermarket", but about relocating the responsibility for the drug pandemic from the legal sector to the health sector. It's a public health issue imo.

Treating sick people like criminals only makes sense as far as you don't know how to treat their illness. It's not a serial killers fault that they're a serial killer, their brain just works in abnormal ways. But since we don't know how to treat them we just lock them up because that's the best we can do with our current understanding of their neurology.

The difference between a serial killer and a drug addict is that a good portion of drug addicts can actually be treated. The problem here isn't that we can't treat them, but that it would be a lengthy process which would cost a lot of time, energy and money. Time, energy and money that a lot of people aren't willing to invest because it's simply not in their own interest (at least from their own POV).

For a long time all we could do was to lock addicts up because it was the better alternative to having potentially dangerous people roam the streets. But as our understanding of mental health and the systemic issues behind drug addiction are getting better, the limitations of this approach are getting more and more apparent. I'm not saying that you can help all drug addicts, at least not in our current state, but that you should at least try to help those that can be helped. We need to develop a long term strategy to move away from this primitive practice of locking people up because we don't bother to care about them.

We used to burn certain mentally ill people at the stake, because they were believed to be "dealing with the devil". Today we can see how these people were just mentally ill and could've been helped if we had the tools we have today. Same can be said about drug addiction today. Eventually we will find the tools to deal with this problem properly, but until then we'll have to have enough empathy for them to actually want to help them. If we don't care about them and regard them as nothing more than lazy trash that belongs into prison, we won't have the motivation to really work on this problem and develop a sufficient win-win solution. Empathy, love and understanding are needed.

Edited by DefinitelyNotARobot

beep boop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And my original question includes legalizing distribution by the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Legalizing distribution would be stupid at our current stage of development. It's like handing a loaded gun to a toddler. Most people are still to unconscious to allow them this level of freedom, unless you care more about their freedoms than creating a safe environment for your average person.

Decriminalization works, but that's different from a full on distribution.

Edited by DefinitelyNotARobot

beep boop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotARobot said:

Legalizing distribution would be stupid at our current stage of development. It's like handing a loaded gun to a toddler. Most people are still to unconscious to allow them this level of freedom, unless you care more about their freedoms than creating a safe environment for your average person.

Decriminalization works, but that's different from a full on distribution.

I think criminalizing distribution, all laws like that anyway, not just drugs, retards development.

It use to be legal to distribute all of them, they criminalized all sorts of things for the industrial revolution workforce and now most people don't mature past 11 years old.

If legalizing use doesn't increase use, why would distribution, marketing yes but only short term

Look at the development caused by the obesity epidemic, people now know they are easily brainwashed into buying things that harm them

Edited by Devin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Devin How so? I'd rather say that laws are a reflection a society's collective stage of development. Reform happens as societies develop. Laws emerge out of necessity. Once a society outlives said necessity its laws will change. I think we're currently hitting the limits of the war on drugs, but I'd say that we're still far away from legalizing distribution. The problem is that these laws are just a symptom of a much broader issue, which is mental health. Legalizing distribution won't actually address the fact that we're unable to properly address mental health issues within society. If we're going to deconstruct these laws we'll need better alternatives for handling drug addiction.


beep boop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Portugal and Spain have decriminalized all drugs. Their results have been really healthy.

There is a problem if drugs are legalized to the point where capitalists can shamelessly market them. That is not a good thing. I feel like weed is way overmarketed nowadays.

Decriminalisation is the way forward. At our current point doesn’t the market have enough matureness to handle legalisation. 
 

If Weed and alcohol would be legal, it better be distributed and sold in a government run store, which isn’t incentivised for profit. The Dutch model of coffee shops. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotARobot said:

@Devin How so? I'd rather say that laws are a reflection a society's collective stage of development. Reform happens as societies develop. Laws emerge out of necessity. Once a society outlives said necessity its laws will change. I think we're currently hitting the limits of the war on drugs, but I'd say that we're still far away from legalizing distribution. The problem is that these laws are just a symptom of a much broader issue, which is mental health. Legalizing distribution won't actually address the fact that we're unable to properly address mental health issues within society. If we're going to deconstruct these laws we'll need better alternatives for handling drug addiction.

I think these laws cause mental health issues, you treat someone like a child all their life they're not going to develop into an adult

I think a developed society would not have laws, it would be "governed" by ethics, morality, and respect. I'm not suggesting we do this, let's just start with weed and shrooms, and apparently menthol.

Edited by Devin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Devin I agree with the basic premise, in that people shouldn't be controlled through fear of persecution, but through love. This love however must be developed over time. This is what spiral dynamic is about: Developing more love. A more loving society is a more developed society. But you can't force people to be loving! They must arrive at it for themselves for it to be true love. The only thing you can do is to love them unapologetically and to be a living example for them.

This kind of change we're talking about, which is a big shift from our current relationship to drugs, has to be developed over time. You can't force such cultural reform. You can't force people to wake up. Forcing them too much into any direction will cause them to revolt against your ideas, even if the ideas themselves are good.

Also, society IS already governed by ethics and morals. People just have different notions of what ethical and moral means. Hitler GENIUNELY believed that he was doing the right thing. He was guided by HIS morals and HIS ethics. People hold all sorts of values which conflict with each other. This conflict creates wars, murder, theft, genocides and so on. The war on drugs is in fact a result of conflicting values. Some people actually think that it's moral to lock addicts up. The point I'm making is that laws are a result of people imposing their morals onto others. It's not that we're not guided by morality, but that we need to develop better ways to resolve conflict. There are more conscious ways of dealing with this problem, but we can't push people towards this level of consciousness. You have to teach a child how to swim step by step. If you just throw it into a river it might drown.

So I agree that we could start with something like weed or shrooms, I mean they're already legal in the Netherlands (though you can only get magic truffles there). But depending on the country you're from this could be a little difficult. A different approach would be to slowly introduce them into society by allowing them for medical use first. You can use them in therapy for example. Introducing them into a professional environment will warm people up to the idea of psychedelics. This might allow us to do more controlled studies too, which would make psychedelics much more credible too. That's how it started with weed in California.


beep boop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DefinitelyNotARobot said:

@Devin I agree with the basic premise, in that people shouldn't be controlled through fear of persecution, but through love. This love however must be developed over time. This is what spiral dynamic is about: Developing more love. A more loving society is a more developed society. But you can't force people to be loving! They must arrive at it for themselves for it to be true love. The only thing you can do is to love them unapologetically and to be a living example for them.

This kind of change we're talking about, which is a big shift from our current relationship to drugs, has to be developed over time. You can't force such cultural reform. You can't force people to wake up. Forcing them too much into any direction will cause them to revolt against your ideas, even if the ideas themselves are good.

Also, society IS already governed by ethics and morals. People just have different notions of what ethical and moral means. Hitler GENIUNELY believed that he was doing the right thing. He was guided by HIS morals and HIS ethics. People hold all sorts of values which conflict with each other. This conflict creates wars, murder, theft, genocides and so on. The war on drugs is in fact a result of conflicting values. Some people actually think that it's moral to lock addicts up. The point I'm making is that laws are a result of people imposing their morals onto others. It's not that we're not guided by morality, but that we need to develop better ways to resolve conflict. There are more conscious ways of dealing with this problem, but we can't push people towards this level of consciousness. You have to teach a child how to swim step by step. If you just throw it into a river it might drown.

So I agree that we could start with something like weed or shrooms, I mean they're already legal in the Netherlands (though you can only get magic truffles there). But depending on the country you're from this could be a little difficult. A different approach would be to slowly introduce them into society by allowing them for medical use first. You can use them in therapy for example. Introducing them into a professional environment will warm people up to the idea of psychedelics. This might allow us to do more controlled studies too, which would make psychedelics much more credible too. That's how it started with weed in California.

Yeah, I don't mean forcing others to comply with your ethics, I mean you abiding by yours.

I think the only necessity of these laws were for functioning cogs in the Carnegie, Chase, Vanderbilt, ... machine during the early 1900s

I don't think they were ever a positive thing for society. And I don't think people will pick up heroin like Cheerios because it's legal, and if they do I don't think it's a bad thing in the end, they'll die don't get me wrong but collectively understanding something is wrong is better than laws, even if the means is people dying so long as it is of their own free will.

Our culture is developed enough for this and has been for thousands of years this stuff has only recently been criminalized but it's prehistoric.

I don't believe in spiral dynamics.

Edited by Devin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now