legalize drugs,save the economy.

DarkJager wrote: »

What about allowing the sale of these substances but restricting their use to private properties, with severe penalties for those who consume or carry them in public? I'm pretty sure most people would be happy with an arrangement like that.

Ok I think I could live with that

ceegee wrote: »

Can't see how that will affect the crime and health issues associated with hard drugs

Where do you see crime fit into that proposal anywhere? In that scenario, the drugs are legalised and the economy is benefitting from the sale, not drug dealers. As for health, please elaborate. If the consumption was allowed on private property, then the concerns about health are down to the user themselves, and are nobody elses business.

dsmythy wrote: »

I don't think alcohol consumption would reduce as a result of legalising other drugs. Tobacco consumption perhaps may fall. The issues with alcohol would remain. Maybe you can bring tobacco in on the subject but i don't think talking about alcohol has anything to do with legalisation of drugs.

But it does have a place in the discussion about legalisation as it has been shown in a number of studies that alcohol is MORE dangerous than both ecstasy and cannabis. Its sickening really to see such a blind eye turned to it when it comes to drug discussion. Ah sure its only drink, but if research is showing that its more dangerous a drug than the 2 mentioned above, why is everyone still so quick to demonise them? it because of years of misguided information about drugs being fed to people. And I'm sure the likes of Diageo would prefer it to remain that way, god forbid they might lose money.

California seems to have the right idea

SACRAMENTO, California: Could cannabis be a salvation for California's fiscal misfortunes?

A member of California's state assembly is introducing legislation to do just that: make California the first state to tax and regulate recreational marijuana.

Assemblyman Tom Ammiano from San Francisco says it is time to reap some state revenue while putting a damper on drug use by teens, cutting police costs and even helping Mother Nature.

"I know the jokes are going to be coming, but this is not a frivolous issue," said Mr Ammiano, a Democrat elected to the assembly in November. "California always takes the lead - on gay marriage, the sanctuary movement, medical marijuana."

Anti-drug groups are anything but amused by the idea of California collecting a windfall from the leafy herb that remains illegal under federal law.

Calvina Fay, executive director of Save Our Society From Drugs, said: "Legalising drugs like this would create a whole new set of costs for society."

Mr Ammiano's measure essentially would replicate the regulatory structure used for alcohol, with taxed sales barred to anyone under 21.

He said it would allow police to focus on more serious crimes while keeping marijuana away from teenagers.

The environment would benefit, too, he said, by uprooting destructive pot plantations that denude fragile ecosystems.

By some estimates, California's pot crop is a $US14 billion ($22 billion) industry. On that figure, the proposal could mean upward of $US1 billion in tax revenue each year.

After posting a $42 billion budget deficit, "generating new revenue is crucial to the state's long-term fiscal health", said Betty Yee, California's Board of Equalisation chairwoman, who supports Mr Ammiano's proposal.

Also in support of opening debate on the issue is the retired Orange County Superior Court judge James Gray, a longtime legalisation proponent.

"I'm a martini guy myself," Mr Ammiano said. "But I think it's time for California to look at this in a truly deliberative fashion."

I think Cannibas should be legalised in Ireland for the simple reason that it is as dangerous as alcohol and it would hurt the drug dealers hugely in their pockets. If we look at how prohibition resulted in a huge increase in crime especially mafia related we can see how legalising cannibas might help our recent crime troubles. After prohibition was abolished Mafia gangs such as Al capones collapsed and the crime relating to them fell off a cliff. We could use a pricing system as proposed by some californian lawmakers. I can guarantee you though the drug dealers will be the first in the queue voting against this in a referendum!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/chris_ayres/article5883986.ece

What about vapourising?

</typical retort>

proabition will never end, why be something that was once some what untracable, will now be monitared in the days where smugelling is getting harder and harder, unless you indeed have the know how capital and intelgence to avaid them...

What the governement wont legalise canibiss any time soon why would they?
there idiot's.. Plus as ireland tend's to bend over for the EU and take a good shfting when ever comanded .... So it wont happen,

With drugs not matter how cleen and legal there are come smugeler's from england america spain france, portugal suddenly ireland would develop a very harsh underworld of exporting drugs fact if proabition ends...
Irish useually get through costoms quite, easilly. Suddenly we'd be searched more,

yes we would gain capital and a couple of 1000 job's but the current governement would take the idea and bassicly Kick it about, untill its a former idea of its self no thanks......

I dont want to live in a country like that how ever savage it sounds
im against it on what it would turn the country into......

Marijuana and ecstasy are the more realistic prospects for legislation as they are comparitively easier substances for governments to produce than cocaine and heroin. According to numerous studies, they are also less damaging for your health than cocaine, heroin, tobacco and alcohol. But the political fallout of legalising even marijuana would be to great for any political party to risk. Also, legislation of marijuana and ecstacy (which I would support if it were to be done sensibly) would more than likely violate EU laws. Any drug legislations would probably need Brussels' backing which is unrealistic.

As for cocaine and heroin, although I am not against decriminalisation of small amounts of these substances (as addicts and casual users should not be punished for their diseases/personal choices), legislation is out of the question, not just because of the harm these substances cause.

Legislation would require a complete change of policy for the EU, the UN, the US and countries where drugs are produced. In fact it would realistically require worldwide agreement and co-operation on the subject. As cocaine production and distribution has failed to be controlled by the governments of Colombia, Bolivia and Peru and other coca productin countries, legislation of this substance would make a multi-billion dollar industry legitimate for tyrants and murderers. The reason how alcohol legislation was possible in the US after prohibition was because the government could control the production and regulation, as the crops to produce alcoholic products are widely available. However this is not the case for cocaine and heroin. In Colombia (where the majority of cocaine is produced), the coca plant is controlled by narco terrorists, paramilitaries and guerillas and are out of reach of the government's control. The same applies with the poppy plant in Afghanistan (where the Taliban controls most of the world's heroin production).

Pablo Escobar's efforts to prevent an extradition bill being passed involved him murdering 3 Colombian presidential candidates in one election race, murdering half of his country's supreme court in one swoop and bombing a passenger airliner. Luckily, his efforts to prevent this bill being passed failed. His overall desire was for cocaine to be legalised and for him to gain further political power and respect through his "business". For cocaine or heroin to be legalised (a terrible idea anyway), massive political power would be placed in the hands of murderers, terrorists and corrupt regimes. I think the democracy of many regions would be seriously compromised as a result of legislation of cocaine and/or heroin (including in Europe and the US).

It is ironic that the America backed war on drugs has created created monsters like Pablo Escobar and made drug problems worse by making the drug trade so profitable for traffickers. Unfortunately there is very little that can be done now to combat supply and demand.

A more productive solution for now I feel would be to stop punishing everyday people for their own personal choices (and mistakes). There is no reason why people caught with small amounts of drugs should be condemned to having a criminal record for the rest of their lives (although seeing junkies on the streets of our capital often leaves me with very little sympathy for them) . Fines, treatment and community service are far more productive solutions than handing users criminal records and prison sentences. This could be a solution to free up resources in order to catch the drug dealers who are making fortunes off everybody's expense.