4 ms·

If you legalize consumption but not production and sale - you make the black market thrive and basically sponsor organized crime. Full legalization is the only

If you legalize consumption but not production and sale - you make the black market thrive and basically sponsor organized crime. Full legalization is the only moral and practical approach.

viraptor 6y ago
There's some threshold you probably don't want to legalise. With less addictive alternatives being available, do you really think that heroin production should ever be legalised? Otherwise what's to stop someone from creating a custom highly addictive drug purely for maximising profit? There are labs ready to do that. In Poland the drug laws targeted specific listed substances for a while which created a market for completely untested substances which were technically-not-drugs and the stock changed immediately after the drug list was updated.
- pessimizer 6y ago
  > do you really think that heroin production should ever be legalised? Yes. The actual cost of producing heroin is about a nickel a dose. Junkies who get their heroin are productive members of society, and aside from the criminal element they're forced to associate with, the crime they commit to get the cash to not get sick, the inconsistency of product, and the aggression of the state, we have no reason to think they wouldn't live long happy lives other than ideological ones. Every junkie death is by statute.
  - viraptor 6y ago
    Why concentrate on ongoing use rather than providing addiction treatment?
    - jowsie 6y ago
      You're a lot less likely to relapse and commit crime when you're already on a stable dose of your drug of choice. Considering how many people in america are on legitimate opiod prescriptions I find it insane how people instantly jump to 'well you wouldn't legalise heroin would you?!', there's no meaningful difference between opiods whether they're prescribed or not.
    - jessaustin 6y ago
      Why concentrate on anything? Heroin addicts who desire treatment will be welcome to it, but others will choose otherwise.
    - Jochim 6y ago
      One argument would be that taxes from the sale could be used to fund better addiction treatment than is currently available. State sanctioned supply would then be taking money out of the hands of organised crime and using it to help the people who need it.
ogre_codes 6y ago
> you make the black market thrive and basically sponsor organized crime You aren't "Making" a market, it exists already. The difference is we are no longer severely punishing the people who are getting victimized. > Full legalization is the only moral and practical approach. Full legalization for most drugs, I agree (weed, LSD, shrooms, plus a few others). But I'm not sure I'd agree that all drugs should be legalized. A measured approach as we have done with MJ is a good idea.
- pessimizer 6y ago
  > The difference is we are no longer severely punishing the people who are getting victimized. No, the difference is that we are no longer victimizing the people who are doing drugs.

If you legalize consumption but not production and sale - you make the black market thrive and basically sponsor organized crime. Full legalization is the only moral and practical approach.

viraptor 6y ago

There's some threshold you probably don't want to legalise. With less addictive alternatives being available, do you really think that heroin production should ever be legalised? Otherwise what's to stop someone from creating a custom highly addictive drug purely for maximising profit? There are labs ready to do that. In Poland the drug laws targeted specific listed substances for a while which created a market for completely untested substances which were technically-not-drugs and the stock changed immediately after the drug list was updated.

pessimizer 6y ago
> do you really think that heroin production should ever be legalised? Yes. The actual cost of producing heroin is about a nickel a dose. Junkies who get their heroin are productive members of society, and aside from the criminal element they're forced to associate with, the crime they commit to get the cash to not get sick, the inconsistency of product, and the aggression of the state, we have no reason to think they wouldn't live long happy lives other than ideological ones. Every junkie death is by statute.
- viraptor 6y ago
  Why concentrate on ongoing use rather than providing addiction treatment?
  - jowsie 6y ago
    You're a lot less likely to relapse and commit crime when you're already on a stable dose of your drug of choice. Considering how many people in america are on legitimate opiod prescriptions I find it insane how people instantly jump to 'well you wouldn't legalise heroin would you?!', there's no meaningful difference between opiods whether they're prescribed or not.
  - jessaustin 6y ago
    Why concentrate on anything? Heroin addicts who desire treatment will be welcome to it, but others will choose otherwise.
  - Jochim 6y ago
    One argument would be that taxes from the sale could be used to fund better addiction treatment than is currently available. State sanctioned supply would then be taking money out of the hands of organised crime and using it to help the people who need it.

ogre_codes 6y ago

> you make the black market thrive and basically sponsor organized crime You aren't "Making" a market, it exists already. The difference is we are no longer severely punishing the people who are getting victimized. > Full legalization is the only moral and practical approach. Full legalization for most drugs, I agree (weed, LSD, shrooms, plus a few others). But I'm not sure I'd agree that all drugs should be legalized. A measured approach as we have done with MJ is a good idea.

pessimizer 6y ago
> The difference is we are no longer severely punishing the people who are getting victimized. No, the difference is that we are no longer victimizing the people who are doing drugs.