3 ms·

Taking drugs and potentially becoming addicted has societal externalities. We currently have a opioid overdose epidemic in the US which taxes the emergency resp

by abnry 6y ago

Taking drugs and potentially becoming addicted has societal externalities. We currently have a opioid overdose epidemic in the US which taxes the emergency response system, not to mention the pain it causes to friends and family. There's a reason opiods are regulated in the medical industry (some would say too little).

pragmatic 6y ago
Addicted to LSD?
api 6y ago
LSD and opioids are very very different things, and a major driver of the opioid epidemic is certain companies in the pharmaceutical industry legally pushing it. IMHO if alcohol and nicotine are legal, then anything "soft" that is not particularly addictive should be legal. It's fundamentally unjust to lock people up for using or having substances that are for the most part less dangerous than entirely legal and socially acceptable substances. Alcohol is actually kind of nasty stuff if you look at the real statistics, especially if used in excess. I'm not claiming LSD is absolutely harmless, just that it's not physically addictive at all and not nearly harmful enough to merit the harsh criminalization and heavy sentences it receives. LSD can be safe and rather interesting if used occasionally but heavy use or use by people with pre-existing psychotic tendencies can be psychologically dangerous. My personal opinion is that drugs like LSD should be subject to some kind of licensing regime similar to other hazardous activities like driving a car, flying a plane, or owning and using firearms (in some states). I would also be in favor of blanket bans or at least heavy restrictions on any advertising for drugs, including alcohol, nicotine, and pharmaceuticals.
- jason0597 6y ago
  >My personal opinion is that drugs like LSD should be subject to some kind of licensing regime similar to other hazardous activities like driving a car, flying a plane, or owning and using firearms (in some states). I disagree. Driving a car or flying a plane can directly harm others, so the licensing process makes sense. Consuming LSD though? It doesn't directly harm others when I consume it.

by abnry 6y ago

pragmatic 6y ago

Addicted to LSD?

api 6y ago

LSD and opioids are very very different things, and a major driver of the opioid epidemic is certain companies in the pharmaceutical industry legally pushing it. IMHO if alcohol and nicotine are legal, then anything "soft" that is not particularly addictive should be legal. It's fundamentally unjust to lock people up for using or having substances that are for the most part less dangerous than entirely legal and socially acceptable substances. Alcohol is actually kind of nasty stuff if you look at the real statistics, especially if used in excess. I'm not claiming LSD is absolutely harmless, just that it's not physically addictive at all and not nearly harmful enough to merit the harsh criminalization and heavy sentences it receives. LSD can be safe and rather interesting if used occasionally but heavy use or use by people with pre-existing psychotic tendencies can be psychologically dangerous. My personal opinion is that drugs like LSD should be subject to some kind of licensing regime similar to other hazardous activities like driving a car, flying a plane, or owning and using firearms (in some states). I would also be in favor of blanket bans or at least heavy restrictions on any advertising for drugs, including alcohol, nicotine, and pharmaceuticals.

jason0597 6y ago
>My personal opinion is that drugs like LSD should be subject to some kind of licensing regime similar to other hazardous activities like driving a car, flying a plane, or owning and using firearms (in some states). I disagree. Driving a car or flying a plane can directly harm others, so the licensing process makes sense. Consuming LSD though? It doesn't directly harm others when I consume it.