Quote from spect8or:
Why wouldn't others (besides you and I)? Because drugs are currently not prohibitively expensive. Like I said, virtually everyone who would want to do drugs is already doing them.
????? I think the fact that it is illegal has something to do with it! You apparently believe that whether or not an act is illegal is not a deterring factor at all. By your logic, if murder was no longer illegal, there would be barely a ripple in the increase of murders. Optional777/ART's ex-wife is alive solely because he feared the consequences. LOL.
Furthermore, back in '88 the former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania quoted a study among New Jersey and California high school students which revealed that 70% of high school students in New Jersey and about 60% of the students in California said that fear of getting in trouble with the law constituted a major reason not to use drugs.
A study conducted at the Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, Columbia University, suggests that legalization of cocaine would result in a five- to six-fold increase in cocaine use. Dr. Robert DuPont, former director of the National Institute of Drug Abuse agrees, stating that legalization would increase the number of users of cocaine and marijuana to between fifty and sixty million, and the number of heroin users to around ten million.
As for the 'social message' being sent, that's kinda bad luck there for you, isn't it? I mean, let's face it, social norms evolve. Maybe you don't like it that homosexuality is becoming more and more acceptable in society, bad luck for you. I don't really see "I just don't like it" as a very compelling argument, do you?
Gay people have just as much a right to be as happy or miserable as straight people. There are reasons why I don't like the concept of legalization, and I've posted them.
Furthermore, as drug use enters the mainsteam more and more, there will also be greater and greater education and understanding of what is involved with drugs. No one will be able to shy away from the issue and sweep it under the rug as is currently being done.
Good grief, drug usage IS IN THE MAINSTREAM! As far as education, everyone knows drugs are bad for you, but that doesn't seem to really matter much. People determined to fuck themselves up will continue to do so. We've known smoking is bad for you for decades yet millions continue to puff away. Why? They're addicts. Legalization will hardly result in a blossoming of new educational measures.
Honestly, having known many 'normal' drug users (my cousin, an IB vice prez, for eg), that just do it recreationally, I hardly expect society to collapse because people can do what they do anyway, just now do it legally.
Show me a crystal meth user who does it "recreationally" and can function normally. I knew a guy in college who had used crystal meth for a year. Not only was that year a blur of wasted time, it took him three years of treatment to function normally. At the very least, admit that over time, hard drug addicts do not perform their jobs at pre-usage levels of competency.
As for your falling prices increasing demand, that's not strictly true either. Demand is quite capable of maintaining its level with falling prices being caused by increased supply. Either way, it's much more likely that existing users will up their intake, coupled with some occasional recreational use, rather than a huge wave of new hard core addicts.
But again, mostly amongst current drug users.
Besides what I've posted above, your argument, even if it was correct, fails to address the seriousness of escalating toward more potent and destructive drugs such as crack or crystal meth. I don't think you truly understand what hard drugs do to people.
I've been friends with some pretty hardcore heroin addicts and, this may shock you, some even actually had jobs.
What a relief to know that some had jobs. How long did they have those jobs, and were they productive at them?
Like I said, you seem to think that addicts will want to do nothing else but get high every spare minute of the day. That's just not true.
Again, you don't know what crystal meth or crack does to people. When addicts aren't using, they're recovering and barely functioning.
In my opinion, legal companies started by entrepreneurs will likely be the lowest cost producers. Perhaps not immediately but in time I think the forces of capitalism will ensure that this happens. So there won't really be anyone to undercut.
Minus their huge drug income, these cartel leaders etc all of a sudden don't look so scary. Like you said, we probably can expect them to put up a fight, but in time they are sure to the way of the hoola hoop.
Any "legal entrepreneur" who starts manufacturing crack for example is going to be a sitting duck. The existing drug barons will kill him for sure. Anyone who tries this route is going to have to live with the prospect that they've been targeted by the cartels. Who's going to want to go into business with that hanging over their head?
Only an existing big corp. would be willing to IMHO, and they would have to really beef up security for their installations, offices, and management. Is it really going to be worth their while? Besides, drugs are pretty cheap already. Corporations like to see their consumer base expand. Assuming you are correct about the drug user population not expanding, is that going to be acceptable to a corp?
I actually see the legalization and loss of stigma attached to drug use as likely to decrease this kind of usage, as many kids do it solely to rebel and be cool.
Besides that study I mentioned earlier, millions of kids smoke and drink alcohol. Why would it be any different with drugs?
Sending these innocents to jail is virtually assured to make them more violent.
Innocents? LOL! Any drug dealer is not "innocent." They know what they're doing is illegal and has enormous consequences. Why are you so adamant about excusing people from personal responsiblity?!?
The principle is that free people should be free to decide what they can consume as long as it doesn't hurt anybody else. It just doesn't get any simpler than that. Yes, their consumption has social costs. And, as you know, so does the overconsumption of hamburgers, and driving cars at excess speed etc.
Ah, the "this is my body I can do with it what I want" argument. The obvious flaw is that drug abuse affect others and results in enormous costs to society in lost productivity, insurance premiums, and higher taxes. That of course is only the money side of things. How do you measure the destroyed lives of the addicts, their families, and often innocent people?
Do some research spec. Did you know that drug use correlates to child abuse? That more than half of the abusive parents in Philadelphia that killed their own children were coke fiends? That 80% of all child abusers in that city used coke? That in D.C. 90% of child abusers were drug addicts?
How can you say there are no other victims when the children born to addicts are so horribly damaged? Do you know what the cost of caring for one crack baby is over its lifetime? Millions.
If we could send all the addicts to a deserted island and just airlift in their drugs and fishing spears a la Survivor and not have to be concerned about them committing crimes, causing accidents, and having to pay for their medical care, etc. - in other words, cut them off entirely from non-using society - I would say go ahead and legalize.
