All Nonviolent Drug Use and Possession Should Be Decriminalized

Don't forget alcohol is one of the [strike]worst[/strike] most widely impactful.... :silly:

The proposition All Nonviolent Drug Use and Possession Should Be Decriminalized may be freely argued for or against of course. I do believe it's the right thing to do as a matter of basic Human Rights and as a matter of Peace and Justice.

I should be clear on what decriminalized means. For this proposition it means adopting the Drug policy of Portugal . The policy has been in effect for 15 years so we know exactly what it is and can see how it's worked for them.

I see some responses have several other propositions and assumptions (which have nothing to do with this one) that I will make topics about and am interested in discussing. Maybe not today. It would be too many at once. This is not about the acceptability of substances used recreationally or an argument that all substances should be freely available to everyone.

"I prefer moderate hope and some likelihood of success to the dream of perfection and the promise of failure." ~ Unknown

Why hardly anyone dies from a drug overdose in Portugal

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/05/why-hardly-anyone-dies-from-a-drug-overdose-in-portugal/

Best read at the link above.


Part of the message is hidden for the guests. Please log in or register to see it.


14 Years After Decriminalizing All Drugs, Here's What Portugal Looks Like

http://mic.com/articles/110344/14-years-after-portugal-decriminalized-all-drugs-here-s-what-s-happening#.e5IPzyota

Much better read at the above link.


Part of the message is hidden for the guests. Please log in or register to see it.

Wescli Wardest wrote: People that feel they need...

Thank you for pointing that out, I missed it when reading what you said.

Wes wrote: I don't think people should do drugs. Recreational, for fun, to expand their minds, what ever. As far as I'm concerned these are all excuses used by addicts. I know that sounds harsh, but here is my reasoning. There is not a lot of health benefits to any recreational drug. Sure there are studies which show correlation between cannabis and some stuff. But that is correlation, not causality.

Well medical cannabis is available in a number of US states so there must be some health benefits to it

No doubt these are definitely all excuses used by addicts, but this does not also mean that all users are addicts.

People like doing these drugs. Sure. That's not bad. I like drinking Dr. Pepper ( soft drink developed in Waco Texas back in 1885). It's like a Coka-cola. It's not good for me. It's loaded with sugar and does have caffeen. And if you told me that it was going to be made illegal I would think you were dumb. But it's not worth going to jail over, so I wouldn't drink it.

Maybe it is stupid to use illegal drugs, but maybe it is even more stupid to make them illegal in the first place. Why criminalise people who don't harm anyone else but themselves? And if they are harming themselves why criminalise them rather than offer medical treatment?

And those are the people that need help. They ones that don't even realize they have a problem. Now the problem is that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. So while I suggest that one might have a problem, unless they see it and want to change all they are going to do is continue their self destructive behavior.

And while You, may not have a problem. There are lots that do and right now, instead of helping them we are arguing to enable them. Awesome.

By putting money into criminalising drug use instead of treating drug use medically doesn't this drastically reduce the amount of services available to problem drug users? Isn't that enabling them too?

Brenna, caffeine, alcohol and nicotine are all drugs which might impact those areas of the doctrine, so is ensuring you get enough sleep each night, arguably so too are painkillers and other prescribed medicines. The areas you highlight need to be kept in mind when we perform all our actions but the idea this equates to an absolute prohibition doesn't follow.

If there is a problem it should be dealt with, if there isn't a problem we don't need to be perfect.

By putting money into criminalising drug use instead of treating drug use medically doesn't this drastically reduce the amount of services available to problem drug users? Isn't that enabling them too?

It’s not enabling. It’s what we call miss allocation of valuable resources.

The reason they are criminalized is because having them legal did more harm than good. And yes, they were all legal once in the US. Looking back to the 1900’s say, 1865, post Us Civil war the mid-west was full of saloons and opium parlors where people could get anything they wanted. And murder rates were so high, theft, poverty and every other kind of bad thing you can imagine was rampant. So starting in the Mid-West and policy that spread back east, lots of things became illegal until it became Federal law.

People keep pointing to Portugal. Whoopty do. We use to have it all legal too. And we thought it was great for years. Until it wasn’t great. Then we get what we have now.

A lot of people are under the delusion that the war on drugs started in the sixties with the criminalization of cannabis. But it actually started much, much earlier. They were just too stoned to realize it. But seriously, cannabis wasn’t even really introduced to main stream America till the 50s. But it was the next targeted once it was introduced.

Medical cannabis has been shown to have some benefits when refined down to cannabis oil. Not being smoked. Medical cannabis has been prescribed for glaucoma patients because it helps them forget about the discomfort and pain. It doesn’t actually help them get over anything.

But like I have said before, what one chooses to foul their bodies with is their issue. I don’t think we should do, smoke, eat, inject or drink anything that isn’t good for you. But, even I have my vices… I love Dr. Pepper.

Whether anyone chooses to admit it or not the numbers do not lie, recreational drugs do more harm to the human body than good. Doesn’t mean they will flat out kill you, but that you would be better off not doing them. People tend to have issue with the use of them rather they realize it or not; and as far as I can tell they tend to not realize it. :blush:

There are so many reasons those things are illegal in the first place that it’s not even funny. And to me it’s frustrating that drug users can’t see it or refuse to see it and it hurts because I know those people have some kind of issue. I wish I could help them, but until they can see it for themselves their just going to keep doing it, thinking how wonderful it is, and think I’m weird. And really feel for those people.

Look, long story short, there is nothing that someone that uses drugs can tell me that will sway me the other direction. Why? Because I believe they are at a conflict of interests. I do not know if they are putting their own selfish desire to get high above the good of the community.

I happen to believe that drugs are, for the most part, not good for you. I believe they are addictive and cause people to do dumb things to get them. I believe an addict will say whatever they can to get their next fix. I believe there are lots of functioning addicts just as there are lots of functioning alcoholics… and that isn’t right either.

When a sober, non-drug user, and not in a position to profit from the decriminalization of illegal drugs, comes to me and says, we should decriminalized drugs and here is why, I will be far more likely to listen to them. Until that day, drug users are wasting their time, effort and breathe trying to convince me otherwise. And that is because I believe they have a conflict of interests and their argument will always be suspect.

Sorry... that's just how it is.

... that's just how it is.

That is leaving out a lot of "how it is" though, Clint.

I have some experience with this stuff - and having had the not-so-sweet kind of experience (that is, falling into it), it peaked my interest to study as much as science can tall us about how addiction works. It isn't quite so cut-and-dry as selfish desires, ethical notions of "good" for the community nor moral ones concerning "liberty". There are other aspects that no one - certainly not the addict - even can begin to consider in most cases.

There is a heavy social element to all the aspects of the question : why do people feel the need to get "high" ? What makes that a "good" feeling ? What about "being high" is recreational and at what point does it tip over into 'desecration-al' ? What is it about our social organisation that compels people to need to "escape" into altered states ? How much of it is "cultural/counter-cultural" (and that is a big ol' barrel, that one) ? What about the (so-called) economic factors ?

Now, with all that socio-economico-politico-psycho .. &c demographic soupe, this doesn't really take into account why people continue to use drugs even after such a point where they clearly recognise that they have a problem with it. Many have tried to stop and simply cannot - even with professional medical help.

There are physical (bodily) factors that influence - or even eliminate - what we would call choice. Now, here, I'm not ONLY talking about environmental factors. Whereas it is almost axiomatic that if one takes a drug (even alcohol) user out of that environment, put them in medical treatment and get the organism free of the drug(s) of predilection, and then, at the end of their treatment, just put them back into the same environment -- well, guess what .... It isn't going to last very long. Be that as it may, those are only the psycho-socio-affective influences. They are strong ones, but not the only ones either ...

... there are also the physical, organic ones. Drugs are like any other thing one absorbs into the body. The body - the physical, bio-chemical, bio-electric process it is - will make the use of it that it can, and discard what it cannot. With some substances, as is the case for alcohol (here, I'm not referring to any of the other nutrients that may come in with the ethanol, but merely to the ethanol itself), it is because the body cannot use it - it is indigestible - that we get addicted to it. The body has to break it down to eliminate it, and it is in that middle phase of its transformation that is produced a molecule, THP, that gets into several different sort of chemical receptors that the nervous system has for our own naturally occurring "drugs". When that starts running low, the body itself demands its replenishment. One can do this, but when in the behavioural habit of the addiction - and it doesn't even have to be to alcohol, but most state-of-being altering drugs work like this on the chemical level - the choice of what to do gets lost in obnubilation the behavioural motivations. In other words, addicts don't use 'excuses', that addictions themselves do.

Moreover, not all bodies are the same. Some people can use drugs recreationally from time to time and never get to the point where they have to have it ; others, from the very first usage are hooked physically. And that is among all the other influencing factors we've evoked above.

So, I feel that drug use should be decriminalised and that it would best be let wholly to the domain of medicine, where I feel that it really belongs. Certainly, there are psychological factors that go along with the medical ones, but nothing really justifies it being considered a crime. One may steal or murder as a result of an addiction - those, yes, are crimes. But the addiction itself is not. As was mentioned before, the production and sale of contraband substances should probably be illegal, since there is no quality control of them. But the addiction to a drug, that is most naturally an illness rather than a premeditated intention to harm others/property/self.

In short, addiction is as naturally occurring as thunderstorms or colds or falling in love -- if the conditions are all present, it just happens. It isn't something one can "legislate".

After all, who would rationally choose to become an addict ? To give up one's own freedom of choice (which addiction is) ?

So, I feel that drug use should be decriminalised and that it would best be let wholly to the domain of medicine, where I feel that it really belongs. Certainly, there are psychological factors that go along with the medical ones, but nothing really justifies it being considered a crime. One may steal or murder as a result of an addiction - those, yes, are crimes. But the addiction itself is not. As was mentioned before, the production and sale of contraband substances should probably be illegal, since there is no quality control of them. But the addiction to a drug, that is most naturally an illness rather than a premeditated intention to harm others/property/self.

I agree... I don't do drugs, or even drink, but I can see that addicts need medical help, not a jail cell.

Akkarin wrote: Maybe it is stupid to use illegal drugs, but maybe it is even more stupid to make them illegal in the first place. Why criminalise people who don't harm anyone else but themselves? And if they are harming themselves why criminalise them rather than offer medical treatment?

I'm taking a blended sociology and philosophy class at the moment, and I just got into it with the professor over the definition of 'crime' and what should and shouldn't be on the books as a law. You're referring to victimless crimes! I believe wholeheartedly that legislature should be limited to crimes with a victim, and not just deviancy.

While there are instances of "victimless crimes" related to drug use, there are also very real issues with real victims. Some drugs (or cocktails thereof) create rage and violent actions, hallucinations (which sometimes lead to violent actions), and death. Also, the sicknesses and injuries that some druggies acquire through their use are then paid for by the taxpayers in multiple countries that have standardized health care. I work currently as a therapist for a nearby prison, and one of my patients was using, thought his wife was an alien trying to kill him, and killed her instead.

While some drugs are relatively victimless, there are true consequences due to the indiscretion and general idiocy of some of the people who use. I lived in Oregon for a few years, and generally, Oregon has a relatively low crime rate. While I was taking classes there, I came to realise a lot of the people in my age range regularly smoked marijuana. If some drugs were legalised and treated like alcohol (no vehicles, no weapons, etc) I do not think that the impact would be as catastrophic as some believe. However, some drugs such as opioids and significant hallucinogens, should be illegal, in my opinion.


Mind you, I'm also very for the concept of a free market system, I just believe that the particularly less-intelligent people would ruin such forays.


Edit:
If we decriminialise drug use, we'll only have more issues in the long run. We'll end up with more addicts, I believe. Yes, I think that addicts should first get medical help for their problem. I believe it's often a symptom of serious issues, and addiction in and of itself is a rather big issue. However, the crimes perpetrated by the addicts cannot just be ignored because they have an addiction. I believe that addicts are being mishandled by the authorities, yes. I believe that methods such as requiring addicts who are not guilty of any other crimes past having/using drugs (this is not including dealers, mind you) to undergo detox is a measure that should be in place. However, most addicts only come to the attention of authorities when they do something ridiculous: stealing drugs from pharmacies, acting violently, driving while intoxicated, etc.

“That’s just how it is” refers to why I have a hard time considering the justifications and reasons of a drug user.

After all, who would rationally choose to become an addict ?

Agreed.

So, I feel that drug use should be decriminalised and that it would best be let wholly to the domain of medicine, where I feel that it really belongs.

Are you suggestion that the medical field will not take advantage of such a thing? That they have our best interest in mind over profit? That the regulation of opiates has not already had to be regulated because doctors were overprescribing them? Yes, the medical field has better drugs than a lot of people can get on the streets. And government agencies have had to step in and regulate those because a few bad eggs were screwing it up for everyone. Again, another group of people that wanted to get high more than they were concerned with the wellbeing of the whole.

People seem to take this topic very personally, which leads me to wonder what emotional stock they have invested in it. But more to the point, a lot of times I feel that what I have said has been looked over. I have already stated that I don’t’ care what people put in their bodies. I have also said that I do not think the government has any right to dictate what we do and do not shove in our bodies.

What I do think is that a well-adjusted, non-addict would choose not to pollute themselves. And that the reasons given to me by drug users, or alcoholics or whatever the persons vice is, will be suspect because one cannot tell what their motives are. Is it out of selfishness? Because, they are in a position that causes them to be at a conflict of interest.

Getting messed up is not the answer to life’s big questions. Nor is it a safe recreational past time; and neither is race car driving or juggling grenades… whatever extreme sport adrenaline junkies do these days.

The only consideration to decriminalize drug use is a non-bias reasoning presenting the benefits of decriminalization outweighing the cost. The only reason to do drugs, is personal for each person. And if their reasons warrant it, then we should do what is in our power to help them.

And since all drugs have at least the ability to have some addictive aspect, rather it be psychological, emotional or physical…

After all, who would rationally choose to become an addict

An interesting alternative to incarceration that was recently presented was to issue citations for non-violent drug crimes. Like, if you’re caught with a joint walking down the street you would be given a ticket. Which I find completely reasonable since you can not walk down the street with a beer. And in some places you can not walk down the street with a cigarette, like in some CA and CO towns.