Legalisation\decriminalisation of Drugs besides cannabis

13-03-2012 02:51AM #1

This is something I've been thinking about recently and I think it is an interesting discussion. While there does seem to be a general consensus on boards (and one that I agree with) that cannabis should be legalised what about other drugs?

I would personally be in favour of legalising other 'softer' drugs like ecstasy, LSD and ketamine etc. While I am not an experienced user of any of the drugs, as far as I am aware there is nothing to suggest that these drugs cause significant long term damage to either users or society (a google will provide a lot of answers). I am in favour of legalising these drugs partially from a civil liberties point of view but more from the view of the money and jobs they would generate for the exchequer.

With regards harder drugs such as heroin and cocaine I would be more in favour of decriminalising possession rather than full legalisation (something along the lines of what is done in Portugal). While I know this conflicts with my earlier argument about civil liberties I believe that these drugs are so addictive and damaging (albeit heroin far more so than cocaine) that full legalisation would have too many harmful effects on society as a whole (and trust me, I'm no nanny-statist).

There are 3 obvious drawbacks that I can see to the decriminisation\legalisation argument however:

1. While I like a drink as much as the next person, I think it is definitely true to say that we Irish have a highly destructive relationship with the drugs that are legal already, particularly alcohol obviously. This could carry on with other drugs.

2. I think it is definitely true that prohibition of drugs has lead to a huge decrease in people taking drugs. Legalisation might lead to a large increase, which might not necessarily be a good thing (although this is admittedly by no means set in stone)

3. Becoming a world drug capital might not be the image we want to project to the world. While it would generate money for the exchequer, the impact on quality of life for Irish residents would be largely negative I would assume. However I suppose this could be overcome by limiting sales of drugs to Irish citizens with stiff penalties to anyone supplying them to tourists.

However having weighed up these options I still think the pros outweigh the cons and a more liberal drug policy would be beneficial as a whole.

TL;DR- what do you think about legalising/decriminalising other drugs besides cannabis (MDMA, LSD, Heroin etc.)

Babybuff · 13-03-2012 02:57AM

Not sure, I would like to be able to use marijuana medicinally as I have glaucoma and I don't take drugs at all, wouldn't be interested in it (or other drugs) for any other reason though. I tend to agree along the lines of point A

Super-Rush · 13-03-2012 02:58AM

I wouldn't call LSD, Ecstasy or Ketamnine soft drugs.

You're a lot more likely to die after one e tablet than you would after one spliff.

I would be very much in favour of legalising cannabis but thats about as far as it should go.

13-03-2012 03:09AM

El Pistolero wrote: »

I wouldn't call LSD, Ecstasy or Ketamnine soft drugs.

You're a lot more likely to die after one e tablet than you would after one spliff.

I would be very much in favour of legalising cannabis but thats about as far as it should go.

To the best of my knowledge, Ecstasy is not particularly harmful. Most of the harm is caused my the ingredients is mixed with which could be closely watched and regulated if it was legal. Look at the chart at the bottom of this article. Actually the whole article is pretty interesting.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5230006.stm

Fromthetrees · 13-03-2012 03:18AM

Drugs are bad news, decriminalising weed seems fine but I genuinely believe most people just don't get how horrible drugs can be.

joshrogan · 13-03-2012 03:20AM

Legalise it all, allow people make decisions for themselves as to whether they want to take certain drugs.

Seachmall · 13-03-2012 10:11AM

El Pistolero wrote: »

I wouldn't call LSD, Ecstasy or Ketamnine soft drugs.

You're a lot more likely to die after one e tablet than you would after one spliff.

That's hardly a fair comparison, and the chances are extremely small of doing yourself harm with MDMA.

E is very much a soft drug. The British Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs reported E to be one of the safest all round drugs in terms of addiction potential, physical harm and social factors (even safer than Weed), and David Nutt (the then head of the council) called it as safe as horse riding.

13-03-2012 06:05PM

Fromthetrees wrote: »

Drugs are bad news, decriminalising weed seems fine but I genuinely believe most people just don't get how horrible drugs can be.

Lots of illegal drugs are less harmful than alcohol.

ScumLord · 13-03-2012 06:17PM

El Pistolero wrote: »

You're a lot more likely to die after one e tablet than you would after one spliff.

I think there is a minority that can have an allergic reaction to E so it's not right to say a normal person without this reaction would have any chance of dying.

Fromthetrees wrote: »

Drugs are bad news, decriminalising weed seems fine but I genuinely believe most people just don't get how horrible drugs can be.

I genuinely believe most people have a comic book villain view of drugs and don't know how great they are for the majority of users the majority of the time. That's why people like doing them, their fun and don't cause any problems to the majority of people that take them.

Logical Fallacy · 13-03-2012 06:20PM

El Pistolero wrote: »

I wouldn't call LSD, Ecstasy or Ketamnine soft drugs.

You're a lot more likely to die after one e tablet than you would after one spliff.

I would be very much in favour of legalising cannabis but thats about as far as it should go.

The statistical likelihood of death from an E tablet is the roughly the same as that of eating a peanut. In fact i am pretty sure it's a little bit higher for a peanut.

I do agree with you though, i would call LSD, Ecstasy or Ketamine "soft drugs" as i feel that downplays the possible short term and long term affects of abuse.

I'd like to see everything up to crack and heroin legal, but only if you needed a license to do them and that license could be removed if you committed any breach of the law while under the influence.

ScumLord · 13-03-2012 06:27PM

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

I'd like to see everything up to crack and heroin legal, but only if you needed a license to do them and that license could be removed if you committed any breach of the law while under the influence.

I think they should only be available to social clubs, a scene of taking drugs socially should be encouraged and plenty of activities should be on offer at the club. It would keep stuff out of shops and allow regulation.

Chuck Stone · 13-03-2012 06:45PM

Peaceful people should be allowed to purchase and consume drugs without being molested by the state.

_Gawd_ · 13-03-2012 06:51PM

ALL drugs should be legal and above board.

If people want to abuse them - let them. Where does your moral responsibility come from? It was their decision and now they must live with the consequences. No longer will innocent people be put out because these cretins shooting each other for money. The crime comes from the illegality of drugs, not because of the drugs themselves.

Anybody that refutes that statement need look no further than 1920's America - Prohibition. As soon as it was repealed, murder rates that were originally off the charts dropped because we substituted back alley gangsters with guns for professional businessmen in the market. Today, this generations Prohibition is the illegality of drugs and we must overcome it by legalizing all drugs.

pragmatic1 · 13-03-2012 06:55PM

El Pistolero wrote: »

I wouldn't call LSD, Ecstasy or Ketamnine soft drugs.

You're a lot more likely to die after one e tablet than you would after one spliff.

I would be very much in favour of legalising cannabis but thats about as far as it should go.

MDMA has a very low toxicity. I'd be in favour of all drugs being legalised.

Chuck Stone · 13-03-2012 07:21PM

ScumLord wrote: »

I think they should only be available to social clubs, a scene of taking drugs socially should be encouraged and plenty of activities should be on offer at the club. It would keep stuff out of shops and allow regulation.

*Nightclubs*

Eric Cartman · 13-03-2012 08:25PM

to be fair, no government should have the right to tell me what I can and cant take, full legalisation would be helpful, but right now getting drugs whether it be Weed, MDMA, Ket etc.. isnt exactly hard. Id just rather my money going to legitimate businesses rather than criminal gangs.

karma_ · 13-03-2012 08:30PM

Babybuff wrote: »

Not sure, I would like to be able to use marijuana medicinally as I have glaucoma and I don't take drugs at all, wouldn't be interested in it (or other drugs) for any other reason though. I tend to agree along the lines of point A

If you'd like to try it, then do, it's obtainable and if you didn't want to try that, it's fairly easy to grow.

Temptamperu · 13-03-2012 08:32PM

Fromthetrees wrote: »

Drugs are bad news, decriminalising weed seems fine but I genuinely believe most people just don't get how horrible drugs can be.

Whats difference would it make if the drug was legal? I'll tell you, none because whether or not its legal its easier to buy than alcohol.
No restrictions, no laws and no quality control that would be the difference I suppose.

Eric Cartman · 13-03-2012 08:40PM

Temptamperu wrote: »

Whats difference would it make if the drug was legal? I'll tell you, none because whether or not its legal its easier to buy than alcohol.
No restrictions, no laws and no quality control that would be the difference I suppose.

+1

I can get a bag of weed delivered to my house at 3am , cant get cans past 10pm , its madness

Babybuff · 13-03-2012 09:15PM

karma_ wrote: »

If you'd like to try it, then do, it's obtainable and if you didn't want to try that, it's fairly easy to grow.

I'd rather take it in medicinal form, like a little pill would be handy. I smoked when I was younger just wouldn't be bothered with it these day's what with being a responsible parent and employee, wouldn't be worth it. Besides that weed just makes me laugh all night, couldn't be having that now I'd never sleep. (honestly drugs don't agree with me so prefer not to indulge)

Irish Guitarist · 13-03-2012 09:27PM

If people want to destroy themselves by taking drugs it doesn't bother me. The problem I'd have with it would be the effect it would have on other people.

Drinking and driving is bad enough without snorting cocaine and driving. And just because these substances would be legal it wouldn't make them any less addictive but people would think "they're legal, they must be alright". As more people take these drugs crime would most likely increase.

n900guy · 13-03-2012 09:29PM

gaffer91 wrote: »

This is something I've been thinking about recently and I think it is an interesting discussion. While there does seem to be a general consensus on boards (and one that I agree with) that cannabis should be legalised what about other drugs?

I would personally be in favour of legalising other 'softer' drugs like ecstasy, LSD and ketamine etc. While I am not an experienced user of any of the drugs, as far as I am aware there is nothing to suggest that these drugs cause significant long term damage to either users or society (a google will provide a lot of answers). I am in favour of legalising these drugs partially from a civil liberties point of view but more from the view of the money and jobs they would generate for the exchequer.

With regards harder drugs such as heroin and cocaine I would be more in favour of decriminalising possession rather than full legalisation (something along the lines of what is done in Portugal). While I know this conflicts with my earlier argument about civil liberties I believe that these drugs are so addictive and damaging (albeit heroin far more so than cocaine) that full legalisation would have too many harmful effects on society as a whole (and trust me, I'm no nanny-statist).

There are 3 obvious drawbacks that I can see to the decriminisation\legalisation argument however:

1. While I like a drink as much as the next person, I think it is definitely true to say that we Irish have a highly destructive relationship with the drugs that are legal already, particularly alcohol obviously. This could carry on with other drugs.

2. I think it is definitely true that prohibition of drugs has lead to a huge decrease in people taking drugs. Legalisation might lead to a large increase, which might not necessarily be a good thing (although this is admittedly by no means set in stone)

3. Becoming a world drug capital might not be the image we want to project to the world. While it would generate money for the exchequer, the impact on quality of life for Irish residents would be largely negative I would assume. However I suppose this could be overcome by limiting sales of drugs to Irish citizens with stiff penalties to anyone supplying them to tourists.

However having weighed up these options I still think the pros outweigh the cons and a more liberal drug policy would be beneficial as a whole.

TL;DR- what do you think about legalising/decriminalising other drugs besides cannabis (MDMA, LSD, Heroin etc.)

Looking for money/income or else some political motivation with regard to drugs (or anything) will fail completely. The only two reasons are a) reducing public health risks and b) redirection of limited police time towards criminal activity that has more public harm.

Left/right/likes drugs/don't like drugs/"want to kill themselves with drugs we need to stop them/not care about them" and personal viewpoints are completely irrelevant. If there is reduced risk to the public in terms of health (i.e., psychosis with cannabis, and association or increase use with ahrder drugs that cause more health problems), and if police can focus resources on crimes that are more dangerous to the public (i.e., cocaine dealers, with weapons, vs some guy smoking weed) then there is good justification for it to be legalised.

In fact, that is exactly the situation with alcohol; illegal, would lead to increased public health concerns by way of methylated spirits and lack of controls of production, and police time would be 99% focussed on someone having a few beers.

As soon as you start putting personal political viewpoints to the front, you fail (i.e., what we have in Ireland: politicians running the country based on personal moral standpoints and not on what is practical and workable). Could we have more police focussed on more dangerous crimes if cannabis was legalised? Could we see improved public health (i.e., less associated drug use like cocaine, and uncontrolled high potency cannabis)?

But in Ireland (and many other western countries), it's: do I like the idea of cannabis smoking people? Not really. Do these people have long nasty hair and not listing to Pat Kenny. Probably. Should the police stop these people doing their nasty drugs? Probably.

...is police time entirely wasted pursuing cannabis-related offences? Definitely.

forfuxsake · 13-03-2012 09:46PM

except tobacco which should go the the other way. After a decade of taking pills, lsd, weed, e and mushrooms, a decade later the only one I regret is the fcuking ciggies. Money down the tube with not one memorable experience to show for it.

df1985 · 13-03-2012 09:52PM

MDMA should be. Its the happiest feeling going, a club full of people on mdma would be a much nicer place than a club full of drunks.

Cocaine-NO. a lot of people in Ireland who've tried cocaine have actually tried talcon powder effectively. we get absolute ****e here that isnt worth a penny.

Good quality cocaine will blow your head off, as someone who did my fair share of good cocaine working abroad it shouldnt be legalised (even if for selfish reasons id like it to be). I know what I looked like on it and you wouldnt want people in everday life walking around like that. The session only stops when you run out of coke/cash and cant get more. Ive seen sound nice guys turn into psychotic lunatics on it. thankfully it only ever turned me into a talkative arrogant arsehole but for some its a lot worse.

grindle · 13-03-2012 10:09PM

Mr.S wrote: »

Ket, a soft drug?!

Yeah, pretty soft. Can have the effect of turning the user into a floppy, blithering twit, but taken pure it's nigh-on impossible to overdose from, given that you'll pass out long before you snort a lethal dosage.

Eric Cartman · 13-03-2012 10:16PM

Irish Guitarist wrote: »

Drinking and driving is bad enough without snorting cocaine and driving.

some people take prescription drugs and drive when they shouldnt. Just because cocaine is legal doesnt mean that people are going to get in a car, snort a few lines and go kill people. I think most people would see it as a recreational thing like alcohol, and it would be the same people who drink drive that drug drive. A little less time busting kids with bags of weed might even free up some garda resources to tackle this.

Temptamperu · 13-03-2012 11:01PM

grindle wrote: »

Yeah, pretty soft. Can have the effect of turning the user into a floppy, blithering twit, but taken pure it's nigh-on impossible to overdose from, given that you'll pass out long before you snort a lethal dosage.

Also it is very good at treating depression, Studies show that 2mg every 2 weeks can help people with Major Depression a lot more than SSID's have been.

partyatmygaff · 13-03-2012 11:13PM

Temptamperu wrote: »

Also it is very good at treating depression, Studies show that 2mg every 2 weeks can help people with Major Depression a lot more than SSID's have been.

Ok, so it could be legalised (Pending the appropriate studies) for treating depression and whatever other psychological illnesses it's capable of treating. In fact, I believe it's already being used as a surgical drug. Drugs when prepared and administered by competent people are fine.

That said, what on earth would make you think that the government would ever allow drugs like ketamine, ecstasy or any other relatively potent drug to be sold over the counter? Even relatively tame drugs like codeine need prescriptions and pharmacist supervision. I don't see the likes of ketamine or ecstasy being available for open sale any time soon regardless of what the general public thinks.

Eric Cartman · 13-03-2012 11:20PM

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Ok, so it could be legalised (Pending the appropriate studies) for treating depression and whatever other psychological illnesses it's capable of treating. In fact, I believe it's already being used as a surgical drug. Drugs when prepared and administered by competent people are fine.

That said, what on earth would make you think that the government would ever allow drugs like ketamine, ecstasy or any other relatively potent drug to be sold over the counter? Even relatively tame drugs like codeine need prescriptions and pharmacist supervision. I don't see the likes of ketamine or ecstasy being available for open sale any time soon regardless of what the general public thinks.

people can be responsible for themselves, there is no legal barrier to me waking up at 10am and downing 2 litres of vodka and dying of alcohol poisoning. Thats perfectly ok in the governments eyes, but If I go out and pop an E and have a good night then im a ' drug abuser' and im awful.

Im not trying to say alcohol is worse (that argument has been done to death) but Im just saying that people can self regulate their intake of any drug, without a pharmacist standing over them.

partyatmygaff · 13-03-2012 11:28PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

people can be responsible for themselves, there is no legal barrier to me waking up at 10am and downing 2 litres of vodka and dying of alcohol poisoning. Thats perfectly ok in the governments eyes, but If I go out and pop an E and have a good night then im a ' drug abuser' and im awful.

I'm pretty sure they'd call you a drug abuser if you downed 2 litres of Vodka as well. The only problem is that in Ireland people have this strange notion that alcohol isn't a "real drug".

Im not trying to say alcohol is worse (that argument has been done to death) but Im just saying that people can self regulate their intake of any drug, without a pharmacist standing over them.

If that's the case, why do you think every single civilised country on the planet does not allow the open sale of potent drugs? I'm not even talking about recreational drugs, let's keep it simple. Say for example... why do you think you can't just walk in to a pharmacy and ask for some warfarin?

Seachmall · 13-03-2012 11:28PM

partyatmygaff wrote: »

regardless of what the general public thinks.

Which is a huge problem in a democratic country.

A quote from David Nutt on reasoning with people,

This is an example of a conversation that I’ve had many times with many people, some of them politicians:

MP: ‘You can’t compare harms from a legal activity with an illegal one.’

Professor Nutt: ‘Why not?’

MP: ‘Because one’s illegal.’

Professor Nutt: ‘Why is it illegal?’

MP: ‘Because it’s harmful.’

Professor Nutt: ‘Don’t we need to compare harms to determine if it should be illegal?’

MP: ‘You can’t compare harms from a legal activity with an illegal one.’

repeats …

- Estimating Drug Harms [PDF]

The assumptions people make because they hear "illegal" and/or "drug" are completely out of touch with reality. And people are being convicted for making reasonable decisions to use one over the other.

Legalisation\decriminalisation of Drugs besides cannabis

Comments