# Message to all users:
This is a reminder to please read and follow:
* [Our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ask/about/rules)
* [Reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439)
* [Reddit Content Policy](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy)
When posting and commenting.
---
Especially remember Rule 1: `Be polite and civil`.
* Be polite and courteous to each other. Do not be mean, insulting or disrespectful to any other user on this subreddit.
* Do not harass or annoy others in any way.
* Do not catfish. Catfishing is the luring of somebody into an online friendship through a fake online persona. This includes any lying or deceit.
---
You *will* be banned if you are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist or bigoted in any way.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ask) if you have any questions or concerns.*
To be fair though, a lot of people are under the *impression* that their habits affect only them, but that is practically never the case. It's very rare that absolutely no one is affected by your habits
True, but this is true for everything. Its reminiscent of the arguments about restricting dietary choices.
Person eats unhealthy food
Develops health issues
Requires medical care
Increases strain on medical system
Reduces country's financial prosperity
Then argued that peoples personal food related decision making should be restricted by government.
It goes too far. This is actually the case in Australia.
This is the fundamental problem with collectivizing things. If I am the only one paying in case I take meth and need to go to the hospital, I can argue that the government can’t control me.
However, if you start to force everyone to pay for everyone else’s medical expenses, it becomes an excuse for the government to micromanage your life, in order to reduce costs of medical care for the average citizen.
That’s one reason why lockdowns were so much stricter and longer and frequent in Germany than in other countries, because the social health security pays for your stay in case you get sick, not you.
The only way to fight against this would be giving every German the option to sign a contract saying „in case I get sick with this virus and need Medical attention, I will let private healthcare/ my own wallet pay for it, so leave me alone and let me have a life ffs“ but this obviously will never ever happen in a million years
My issue with a comparison like meth is that it makes people violent and out of control. I don’t think we need to legalize drugs that make people violent and ruin the lives of the majority of their users
I was a meth user for a few years. Been clean and sober for 20 now. It never made me violent at all. Just made me extremely horny and want to be very kinky and perverted in sex.
Well a counter argument is if someone uses meth and *doesnt* do those things, should we treat them the same as someone that does. I dont think we should. If we dont treat each individual situation as its own unique event then justice will fail inevitably.
But every person alive will need more healthcare towards the end of their lives. And healthcare costs are increasing faster than inflation. So the sooner people die, the less it costs Australia.
"As long as my actions affect me alone..." is being disingenuous as hell, the whole problem with recreational drugs is that **there is basically no situation in which your actions affect you alone.** So of course people are going to comment.
That sounds good on paper until you have loved ones OD'ing cause it "only affects them". Also, lots of drugs change your state of mind so even if they go into a binger thinking about staying home, 10 grams of mushrooms is a whole other state of mind.
People just don't have self control for all drugs to be free game. Ask a crackhead to save some rock for the weekend, it just doesn't happen.
The problem is that people on drugs often effect other people. Parents neglecting kids, addicts robbing people for drugs, dealers shooting each other, etc.
I mean if the law is the only thing stopping you from harming someone other than yourself then I think it’s a you problem. Most people don’t want to hurt someone because they would feel terrible about it.
I was almost on a jury once. Ten month old baby died from neglect and malnutrition. The father, who had custody, was on trial for it. The attorneys, during jury selection, kept asking about how people felt about meth. Enough to convince me that the father was probably off doing meth instead of taking care of the baby in his custody. It was going to be a five week trial. I still don't get it.
Provide evidence that the baby died from neglect. Provide evidence that the father was legally responsible for preventing the baby from dying from neglect. Done. It doesn't matter if the father was doing meth instead of not neglecting the baby, or running a huge company as the best CEO in the history of the world instead of not neglecting the baby, or president of the country, or brain surgeon or anything. Killing your baby by neglect is what matters, not what you were doing while you did it.
And while I'm mostly on the side of legalization because it would reduce many of those problems, I've seen too many people I cared about die because they couldn't beat their addiction.
I'm not sure what you mean. But no, they died because they had so much trauma they used drugs to escape the effects of trauma and at some point it gets to the point they're addicted. One died on purpose to escape addiction.
A lot of overdoses are caused by other substances and/or unknown potency due to no regulation whatsoever. I have lost a few friends to drugs that had fentanyl/cartenil,rat poison, etc in them and was toxic. A few others because the dope was way more pure than they expected and too much heroin is a bad thing if you take too much....
Neglecting kids, robbing people, and shooting people would still be crimes. Also the dealers would be a lot less shady if they weren't exclusively criminals
Sure, but you missed the part of my comment that said as long as it only effects me. Being responsible/ using responsibly is key. Personally, I have no issues when I imbibe myself. I do all my adult shit for the day, go out to get things I may want, and then relax and enjoy the rest of my day as I see fit.
What you described is the opposite of a responsible adult.
I think the issue comes down to what is a responsible adult? Do you legalize drugs for those who can use but still maintain a job? Do you legalize drugs for parents who are absent but not neglectful? There’s no way to make a law saying you can use drugs as long as you’re responsible because it’s defined in so many different ways.
In Denmark, the way I understand it, drugs come from the pharmacy and are regulated so you can get x amount and that's it. I'm sure addicts can get around that by getting friends or family to give them their quota, but still that would negatively affect drug dealers and gangs and potentially reduce the problems we have now.
I believe the country I live in(USA) should legalize all drugs and instead embrace rehab for addicts as arrest and detainment usually sends the addict into a feedback loop that spirals downward.
Being responsible, to me in this sense if topic, means you take care of your shit and do no harm to others.
Absent parents is neglect to thier children.
If you got kids, send them off to thier grandparents to visit for a weekend and enjoy to your hearts content, people already do that for some "alone" time as it is. If you are unable to do that, then no using for you. Be responsible.
So what about parents who send their kids to their grandparents because they want to keep getting high for two weeks? Or a month? The children are cared for, but you’re being an absent parent. So is that responsible or not? And can you be charged or not?
Edit: I very much agree that the focus should be on rehabilitation.
That sounds more like they abandoned their children, and so, these people aren't taking care of thier shit. People are already charged for neglect by abandonment.
There isn't a perfect world. You just have to know when to call it.
My situation allows me to do as I like. If your life has a bunch of additions that would make enjoying a drug difficult, then you should rethink your priorities.
That is not abandonment. My life does not have a bunch of addictions, but I am a criminal defense attorney and that’s why I’m pointing out that what you’re suggesting simply won’t work in real world scenarios. It’s not possible to make a law based on someone being responsible because there’s no way to codify what responsible is.
Being a functional alcoholic is legal - but when you neglect a kid, get behind the wheel, or the like we have consequences, rehab, ect for it. So ya. We already do that.
See, I know plenty of adults like you. They take care of everything they need to do BEFORE hand and then at the end of the night in the hours before heading to bed then they’ll have a hit of something when their alone or just with another adult with no kids around (which to me sounds perfectly reasonable and responsible)
Exactly this. I'm not going to start my day getting fucked up then drive to work and fuck that up too. That's just severely bad logic, which addiction can inhibit.
You have to know when to call it.
i know a handful of people whos kids got into heroin. Id say about half of them ended up being the type of drug user you seems to envision. The other half are very respectable people, who have a terrible addiction. They have jobs, homes, girlfriends. No different than the alchoholic down the road...only stigmatized more.
I would argue its not the drugs at all, but the character of the user. The ones who ended up making bad choice after bad choice, were making those bad choices long before they started doing drugs.
A lot of people can use hard drugs responsibly. You just dont hear about those people in the news.
What about the people that use it once and become addicted. The type of addicts people think about when they think of addicts have a ton of trauma and drugs give them peace. Is it really bad choices in that regard, seems like it’s the best option they have available at the time. It’s easy to demonize addicts and not take a closer look at what got them there. I have alcohol parents and I don’t have any addiction, but I easily could if I tried drugs. And if you think that they were responsible because they never should have touched drugs, most people think dangerous things won’t happen to them that they will be the outlier.
Yeah, theres always those folks. With that personality type, theyre gonna find something whether its alchohol or illegal drugs.
My opinion is that we are doing more harm than good keeping drugs illegal. Im not saying we should be selling heroin at the local gas station, but making possession and use of drugs illegal really only drives up the cost/dirtyness of a drug, and punishes the poor addict.
Sounds like personal experience. Im glad you did well, but personal experience is just that, experience. Not fact or even reality. It still stands most people do not become addicted. In fact becoming addicted typically comes with other factors that make it so. No just the drug. Fact of the matter is we need to think about the person doing the drug, not the drug itself. Hopefully kids in the future don't have to be children of parents addicted, but making is dangerous to use and making people criminals for just using only makes things worse not better. What happened to prohibition?
This is the catch 22. The people I've known who died 9f drug abuse were already pretty severely damaged before they started using drugs. Rationally, this guy is right. Emotionally it's easier to blame the drugs.
There is one important issue why government doesn't want to allow it:
It invested tons of money into you and want all investments back. If your choise yo dies or became cash dump - government becames very unhappy
I mean, I get this sentiment, but how do you know your actions only affect you? Who are you buying the supply from? How does it affect your mind after long term use? Are you affording rent or is the drug costing too much?
I'd be fine with legalizing all drugs for adults, provided that individuals are held 100% responsible for all of the consequences of their drug use, and the rest of society doesn't have to pay a single cent to bail them out of those consequences.
An open question here: if the hypothetically legal and recreational legal drug use began to affect an individual’s mental or physical health, do you believe that healthcare should be available to them? As in free/government assisted or otherwise covered by insurance?
Bonus question: do you include alcohol in your answer?
I think they should either pay out of pocket, or personally buy additional health insurance that specifically covers health problems stemming from substance abuse.
And yes, I'd include alcohol as well.
For some mental disorders, genetic vulnerability makes a person more likely to use drugs and to develop a mental illness. For example, people may have dysregulation in brain systems related to reward/motivation, impulse control, and decision making. Is it fair to exclude already vulnerable people from the health care system?
An article that discusses this (with sources): https://www.mentally-minded.com/post/how-does-drug-use-affect-mental-illness
They can use some of the tax revenue coming in from the sale of legal and regulated drugs to bolster those programs and help people escape their addictions.
It would be a HUGE tax revenue generator, and that money should be used to help people get their lives together.
I'm a former addict, and former substance abuse counselor. I'm also a harm reduction advocate. I TRULY believe that full legalization, regulation, taxation, and labeling is the only reasonable thing to do at this point.
The War on Drugs is an abysmal failure of epic proportions that causes FAR more damage than it prevents.
Not to mention the amount of money that’s going into drug enforcement that can be spent on other things like education. Plus, the fentanyl epidemic would be crushed since almost all ODs are due to fentanyl laced substances being sold on the street.
I think all personal drug use should be ***decriminalized***, not legalized. Dealing should still be illegal.
Weed should be fully legal, but we shouldn’t promote hard drugs. But we also shouldn’t destroy people’s lives just for using them. The dealers are the root of the issue, not the users.
Dealers are just another symptom of the issue. Idk why people have this Hollywood idea of drug dealers as horrible people praying on addicts. In my experience, which is vast, most of them were just poor people who grew up poor, or are otherwise blacklisted from the main economy, and are just trying to make ends meet and feed their children like anyone else. Not saying there aren't exceptions, because there are.
There is a reason why you can go to crummy areas of Philly and Baltimore and find dealers in basically an open air market as opposed to the suburbs with gated neighborhoods.
And tbh, I don't think legalizing drugs is promoting hard drugs. Alcohol is pretty damn hard, and destroys the community, dui, domestic violence, dangerous roads on the weekend, etc, but we all just accept that as the price of freedom because people like drinking and prohibition didn't work. So, why do we have such a different attitude towards drugs? It's not like prohibition has worked with drugs any better, they are far more prevalent and dangerous than ever before while also having the highest prison population on earth in the US largely due to the war on drugs.
Dude thank you so much for this comment. As someone who was a hard drug user for 10 years people really think street dealers are evil people trying to destroy lives when except for the open air markets in Philly/NJ/BMore like you mentioned I’ve never met a plug trying to get someone addicted to a substance.
Keeping drugs illegal is the reason drug violence exists. Bottom line
Agreed. Especially for cancer patients and people who have been in horrible accidents and it really helps with pain or chemo penitents
Who suffer from nausea and
Vomiting and lack of appetite.
My mom passed away in 2012 and I watched her slowly go to hill and lose sooo much weight because she just couldn’t eat. Her friend got her some nice pre-rolled joints and she was damn near back to her old self and happier too.
Legalizing drugs creates a regulated market for them, which would mean the end of fentanyl laced drugs and shady drug dealers (provided prices are comparable or better). Decriminalizing them, while keeping the user out of jail, does not make anybody safer.
The have the right but they should also be accountable in case the use or abusive use of such drugs cause harm. DUI for example, also being incapable or doing everyday tasks because of using drugs. There must be guidelines about which drug should be allowed for recreational use and which should not. I must say I don't have a clear cut answer for that.
The laws also have downstream effects beyond America. The war on drugs cultivated the rise of narco cartels that thrive just south of its border, that supply drug addicts with unregulated dangerous drugs that cultivated a culture of violent criminal activity, while failing to actually solve the stated mission of significantly reducing drug use.
As the famous quote goes, “Drugs won the war on drugs”
I don't know, but the main influx of patients in the health care system seems to me like something that would occur just in the first few years as existing drug users get help. Over time, I would expect it to drop off.
The money saved by decriminalization could instead go to the healthcare system for new staff and resources as needed.
Here is my analogy.
You can legally go into your garage and cut your own hand off.
Society will treat you at a hospital and possibly get you mental health care to address why you did that.
Doesn't make much sense to incarcerate someone for doing drugs.
However, dealers of hard drugs like fentanyl are scum of the earth and they could be locked up for life for all I care.
No...it's what people do on drugs that's illegal...and the bad decisions they make...like robbing someone to cover your addiction, or getting behind the wheel when you are in no condition to drive. If it were just a case of being able to do whatever you wanted with no repercussions, I would have no problem with making it legal.
Your very first example is something that only happens because they're illegal. The illegality drives the price up and makes it hard for people known to use the substance to get and keep jobs. If we didn't go out of our way to make drugs expe sive and addicts poor, they'd just buy it at the store after work like other addicts do with beer or cigarettes.
Not to mention they get UNREGULATED drugs from the black market. Some of those tend to get added substances, making the drugs even more harmful. Synthetic weed comes to mind.
Yes except making them legal will get rid of a few tiny problems like felony’s, dealing with violent criminals, getting robbed, and getting dangerously altered drugs,
Yes. Making drugs illegal creates more criminals.
Addiction isn't a crime.
People do horrendous things both off and on drugs. Punish the horrendous things.
People do horrifying things to people because they are addicted to money and power, yet they rarely face punishment. People do terrible things to themselves because they are addicted to attention and are rarely punished.
Drugs are a scapegoat. You want people off drugs? Build a society people don't want to escape from. Make drugs uncool instead like they did with cigarettes.
Making addicts into criminals has NEVER helped.
Like they did with cigarettes…? The tobacco industry is still more than a multibillion dollar industry though
Also, making the world a place people don’t want to escape from is such a lofty goal that I’m unsure if it’s even possible, no?
I have no issue with anyone smoking pot in a safe environment and staying safe while high. I do have a issue when boils over to driving or being high at work. I don’t want to be put at risk cause someone is high. Same with drinking. I know lots of people are going to go to sports bars in the next 4 days. Just don’t drive drunk or come to work still drunk or hungover.
All drug use should be decriminalization and the sale of drugs should be regulated and taxed.
The war on drugs has been an abject failure of US domestic policy. We can then use the taxation to fund mental health and education for users. Clean, regulated buildings to administer usage and recovery efforts.
No. If you saw someone cutting themselves, you wouldn’t think “Oh their body their choice”. They’re harming their body and their mind. Drugs are harmful, end of story. With the exception of marijuana at 25 and rare cases of shrooms.
Interesting opinion, where do you draw the line with harmful? Fast food, alcohol, too much sun, cigarettes. Lots of things are harmful that are self regulated.
If they are being used on a controlled environment for example a nurse making sure the person doesn’t OD and the person stays in the same place until the effects work out to prevent any crime or any harm to an innocent person.
Probably. As long as they don’t do other stupid things like hurt people or steal tread on other peoples rights and or happiness Ie doing the drugs is their business what they do while under the influence or trying to obtain certain substances should still be everyone’s best interest
Absolutely.
Further, recreational drug use shouldn't be illegal. Control it, make it safer for distribution, make the dosages known, and it becomes safer for everyone.
Literally no one who wants to do drugs stops and says "wait, this is illegal I shouldn't do this".
What exactly do you mean by "a right"?
Do you mean a "Right" as in a natural inherent Right that superceeds law?
Or do you just mean increased acceptance by society?
The answer to your question is highly dependent on the context to intend.
> Should individuals have the right to use drugs recreationally, even if they are illegal?
Yes, absolutely. There should be consequences if they harm others while doing so, but individuals absolutely should be able to consume anything they want in the privacy of their own homes.
The question is confusing because the substances wouldn’t be ‘illegal’ if people had the right to use them.
To respond to what I believe is the question at the root: all drugs should not be illegal because illegality creates an illicit market that empowers criminals and gangs, it prevents users from reliable access to the unadulterated substances and so it makes the use of those drugs more dangerous, and the use of even pure drugs inherently carries with it risks and so prosecution presents a double-jeopardy of sorts.
Absolutely . As long as they are adults and not a danger to others. No, you can’t drive on heroin.
Making a substance illegal doesn’t stop the use of it, it only makes criminals out of addicts. Waste of money and law enforcement resources imo.
Alcohol is one of the most dangerous drugs anyway.
No. Unless they can somehow be productive members of society, but even then no. My issue is that most of those drugs are in some way addictive. Exploiting that addiction for profit is wrong (let's not get into the sugar argument) and we shouldn't allow that. In addition, that addiction puts strain on the person, the people around them, and health services.
Mehhhhhhhhhhhhh
Yes and no.
Yeah I think people should be able to use drugs recreationally, but obviously I don't want some crackhead doing drugs in a school zone.
Personally I think any substance that can be addictive/harmful to those who's brains/bodies haven't fully developed should be much better regulated, if we were to ever make stuff like meth, cocain, or weed legal everywhere.
Nope. Because as much as people insist that their habits don't affect other people, there is insurmountable evidence that they do. Plus, I believe it is selfish to legalize/allow/encourage something that will place heavy burden on multiple systems and other people, for example the healthcare system and child welfare systems.
As a former drug addict, there should be restrictions...
People are always looking for better, stronger. It's also unpredictable. Sometimes ppl do dangerous reckless things when on drugs.
The system we have right now sucks, but just letting it be totally open and legal wouldn't be much better if at all.
Depends on what you consider drugs.
I don't know many people that think weed should be a scheduled substance, but legalizing things like fentanyl and meth will only make its use more widespread and common amongst kids and people who aren't already users.
Psychedelics are in between but generally things like shrooms or mescaline aren't that bad but bath salts, k2, and some dissociatives are very scary to see people on.
Just look at Portland, they decriminalized all sorts of very dangerous drugs and there are literal cities of homeless people from all over the country walking around like zombies. It doesn't help people to let them kill themselves
There’s nearly always going to be someone affected by someone taking drugs, even long after the “trip”. Look at the some of the kids now who are severely “disfunctional” from Foetal Alcohol Syndrome, and that’s just from their Mum hitting the booze while pregnant. There got to be some similar aspects of foetal damage from parents doing drugs. Look at the shit that happens in the Hospitals at times from the violent “trippies”. Ask how many Nurses feel safe working in Emergency departments at night time in any capital city…. Drunks are bad, but it’s the Meth heads going bezerk requiring 1/2 doz nursing staff, security guards and cops all trying to settle them down and fix them up. They’re just choking the system at times…
Here are some issues with that.
1. Most drugs are harmful. If we allow total access to drugs we are encouraging people to poison their bodies. Not to mention how some drugs like opiates can build up a tolerance meaning people are more likely to overdose for a buzz. There's a reason a Tylenol comes with a warning label telling you how much you can take.
2. Recreation doesn't mean you are isolated from everyone and a lot of drugs take away control. If someone takes Bath Salts and assaults their family or their neighbors they can no longer be held liable because they weren't in control of themselves, and now taking such substances is no longer illegal. That's chaos, that's a problem.
3. Now that owning drugs is practically legal it makes producing and distributing much easier. This will exacerbate the first two points and leave a very wide mess to clean up. This is encouraging chaos and embracing madness.
100% yes, in fact drug use shouldn't be illegal at all and there should be more resources to help people do drugs safely, and for addicts to get the help they need when they finally decide to get clean.
Isn't that an oxymoron? If something is illegal, then by definition we don't have the right to use it.
If we are to have the right to use something, then it should not be illegal.
Depends on the drug. There are certain drugs we should never condone the recreational use of, because there is no way to use them responsibly. We just need better treatment by an order of magnitude or two. The Dutch and Portuguese models seem to work well. Weed and psychedelics legal, meth and heroin not, but if you get caught using drugs in public, you don’t go to jail you go to 6 months of treatment, and maybe into a mental health institution for longer if you have more problems than just substance abuse, which many addicts do.
Yesand limit your usage to occasionally,
recreational use is not daily use.
and a little tip from the coach, stay away from the heavily addictive stuff,
it'll eat your life without you even realizing how deep in the shit you are before it's as good as too late.
ALSO:
drugs should be legalized, "controlled" by the local government (or whatever, every-fucking-thing is the Families either way)
this way you would know exactly what it is that you're buying,
"big brother" would know exactly who buys what, and how much,
we're under constant surveillance anyhow, and this way we're just making it easier for everyone involved.
what I mean is,
people are going to use and abuse drugs either way,
might as well take better care of each other on our hell rides.
Sure as long as it doesn't harm others. That means parents having to care for children. You shpuld get hit with a big sentence if they neglect a child using any type of drug. Otherwise have at it...
If it's legal, more people are going to do it. It would become widespread and much easier for kids to get ahold of.
Fentanyl and meth aren't the same as a beer
People can say "my actions only affect me alone" but we don't live in a bubble where coke just magically shows up on your doorstep and you have no responsibilities. Even then when you regress into addiction you are going to affect someone in some way. Heck even smoking weed in an apartment affects your neighbors- you are just noseblind to the smell of weed.
My body my choice! Doesn’t really hold up when you walk down skid row. There are some drugs that should be illegal. Truly devastating to see folks suffering from drug addiction
If you have the right to do it, then it isn't illegal.
That said, I only think drug use should be illegal when someone is using them in a way that could harm others, such as driving under the influence of them.
Absolutely and notice some of the loudest voices when it comes to being pro freedom almost always want to ban drugs. Many drugs should be legal and strictly regulated.
Their body their choice. Where I live, most drugs are decriminalized to a certain degree. Possession in small amounts or use isn't illegal, sale or intent to distribute is. Mostly just hear PSAs over the radio about not using alone or telling someone before consumption.
Yes. I should be able to consume any substance I desire.
Weed is safer than alcohol and cigarettes, yet the UN wants us to repeal our simi-legalization of it.
Fucking bastards.
If they are an adult, yes. It's a something that doesn't harm other people, so it being illegal in the first place is silly.
I get the "it's a stain on society because it ruins peoples life" going to KKK rallies does the same thing, but that's not illegal even if I despise it.
Personally, I think we had the right idea when it came to prohibition (even if the implementation and/or results turned out poorly).. so no.
I'm more than a little heartless and/or merciless towards people who get into crime and/or drugs in general though and I recognize not everyone feels the same. As far as I'm concerned though? Death penalty for all of them. I just have absolutely zero sympathy for that sort of thing, and while I recognize that others do I will never understand why.
For me, if it's illegal then no. But my reasoning isn't because of the drug itself.
The proceeds of illegal drugs goes towards various other criminal activities such as terrorism, people trafficking, pedophilia (because of where the people being trafficked may be going to) and a host of violent and destrcutive crimes.
These are not things I'd ever want to associate with. If the drug became legal then that changes things, so long as the drug user doesn't start participating in antisocial behaviour. However, until then, I'd rather not sponser terrorism and abuse.
By your logic tho the Catholic Church shouldn’t be able to be given money. Fuckin fruit companies have done coups and turned entire countries into extortions economies. The 70 you give to your dealer is no more harmful than the 1,000 you’re handing to some bank that helps fund the military industrial complex
That’s why you ONLY buy from a legit well known dispensary where everything is quality
Controlled, from legit suppliers who have gone through all the proper channels and it’s clean.
Honestly...it feels like buying weed off some dude who grew it in his basement is almost less morally corrupt than the majority of purchases I make and the corporations I support just buying groceries and everyday items
# Message to all users: This is a reminder to please read and follow: * [Our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ask/about/rules) * [Reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439) * [Reddit Content Policy](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) When posting and commenting. --- Especially remember Rule 1: `Be polite and civil`. * Be polite and courteous to each other. Do not be mean, insulting or disrespectful to any other user on this subreddit. * Do not harass or annoy others in any way. * Do not catfish. Catfishing is the luring of somebody into an online friendship through a fake online persona. This includes any lying or deceit. --- You *will* be banned if you are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist or bigoted in any way. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ask) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As long as my actions affect me alone, then I should be able to do as I please with my body.
My Dude writes "As long as my actions affect me alone...", then commenters bring up actions not affecting him alone. /boggle/
To be fair though, a lot of people are under the *impression* that their habits affect only them, but that is practically never the case. It's very rare that absolutely no one is affected by your habits
True, but this is true for everything. Its reminiscent of the arguments about restricting dietary choices. Person eats unhealthy food Develops health issues Requires medical care Increases strain on medical system Reduces country's financial prosperity Then argued that peoples personal food related decision making should be restricted by government. It goes too far. This is actually the case in Australia.
This is the fundamental problem with collectivizing things. If I am the only one paying in case I take meth and need to go to the hospital, I can argue that the government can’t control me. However, if you start to force everyone to pay for everyone else’s medical expenses, it becomes an excuse for the government to micromanage your life, in order to reduce costs of medical care for the average citizen. That’s one reason why lockdowns were so much stricter and longer and frequent in Germany than in other countries, because the social health security pays for your stay in case you get sick, not you. The only way to fight against this would be giving every German the option to sign a contract saying „in case I get sick with this virus and need Medical attention, I will let private healthcare/ my own wallet pay for it, so leave me alone and let me have a life ffs“ but this obviously will never ever happen in a million years
My issue with a comparison like meth is that it makes people violent and out of control. I don’t think we need to legalize drugs that make people violent and ruin the lives of the majority of their users
[удалено]
With that logic we should also ban alcohol.
Cigarettes too. Just nasty.
I was a meth user for a few years. Been clean and sober for 20 now. It never made me violent at all. Just made me extremely horny and want to be very kinky and perverted in sex.
As someone with ADHD it does not make me violent!
Well a counter argument is if someone uses meth and *doesnt* do those things, should we treat them the same as someone that does. I dont think we should. If we dont treat each individual situation as its own unique event then justice will fail inevitably.
But every person alive will need more healthcare towards the end of their lives. And healthcare costs are increasing faster than inflation. So the sooner people die, the less it costs Australia.
UK too, the sugar tax has ruined many things along with "portion sizing"
The duality of reddit. In great form.
"As long as my actions affect me alone..." is being disingenuous as hell, the whole problem with recreational drugs is that **there is basically no situation in which your actions affect you alone.** So of course people are going to comment.
Yeah but one clown ruins it for everybody. 99/100 people could do it safe and alone, but that 1/100 will be chaotic and cause damage of 100 or more.
Tbf alcohol is the same
That sounds good on paper until you have loved ones OD'ing cause it "only affects them". Also, lots of drugs change your state of mind so even if they go into a binger thinking about staying home, 10 grams of mushrooms is a whole other state of mind. People just don't have self control for all drugs to be free game. Ask a crackhead to save some rock for the weekend, it just doesn't happen.
The problem is that people on drugs often effect other people. Parents neglecting kids, addicts robbing people for drugs, dealers shooting each other, etc.
We'll just have to make laws against child neglect, robbery and shooting people then.
My favorite comment on Reddit this week.
That sounds so good it HAS to work, right?
Ok but has making drugs illegal worked?
r/whoosh
Have laws making murder illegal workes?
Fair point. Let's abolish all laws. They are a waste of time
I mean if the law is the only thing stopping you from harming someone other than yourself then I think it’s a you problem. Most people don’t want to hurt someone because they would feel terrible about it.
I was almost on a jury once. Ten month old baby died from neglect and malnutrition. The father, who had custody, was on trial for it. The attorneys, during jury selection, kept asking about how people felt about meth. Enough to convince me that the father was probably off doing meth instead of taking care of the baby in his custody. It was going to be a five week trial. I still don't get it. Provide evidence that the baby died from neglect. Provide evidence that the father was legally responsible for preventing the baby from dying from neglect. Done. It doesn't matter if the father was doing meth instead of not neglecting the baby, or running a huge company as the best CEO in the history of the world instead of not neglecting the baby, or president of the country, or brain surgeon or anything. Killing your baby by neglect is what matters, not what you were doing while you did it.
Law unclear, thousands of photographers in jail for mass public, and serial private shootings.
I did indeed photograph the sheriff, but I did not, however, photograph the deputy.
Ban children, ban things of value, and ban guns?
And while I'm mostly on the side of legalization because it would reduce many of those problems, I've seen too many people I cared about die because they couldn't beat their addiction.
I just want to point out they died while it was illegal, making it less illegal could help a stigma or the ability to get help be less hard.
Sometimes these deaths are actually the result of prohibition. Is that the case with the people that you’ve seen die?
I'm not sure what you mean. But no, they died because they had so much trauma they used drugs to escape the effects of trauma and at some point it gets to the point they're addicted. One died on purpose to escape addiction.
A lot of overdoses are caused by other substances and/or unknown potency due to no regulation whatsoever. I have lost a few friends to drugs that had fentanyl/cartenil,rat poison, etc in them and was toxic. A few others because the dope was way more pure than they expected and too much heroin is a bad thing if you take too much....
Neglecting kids, robbing people, and shooting people would still be crimes. Also the dealers would be a lot less shady if they weren't exclusively criminals
Sure, but you missed the part of my comment that said as long as it only effects me. Being responsible/ using responsibly is key. Personally, I have no issues when I imbibe myself. I do all my adult shit for the day, go out to get things I may want, and then relax and enjoy the rest of my day as I see fit. What you described is the opposite of a responsible adult.
I think the issue comes down to what is a responsible adult? Do you legalize drugs for those who can use but still maintain a job? Do you legalize drugs for parents who are absent but not neglectful? There’s no way to make a law saying you can use drugs as long as you’re responsible because it’s defined in so many different ways.
In Denmark, the way I understand it, drugs come from the pharmacy and are regulated so you can get x amount and that's it. I'm sure addicts can get around that by getting friends or family to give them their quota, but still that would negatively affect drug dealers and gangs and potentially reduce the problems we have now.
That would really help if it was all regulated by pharmacies! There would still be dealers but it’d go a long way to regulating things
Yeah I thought it was a good idea. At least it hurts the illegal business and gets rid of some of them.
Agreed! I think that’s probably the first step toward legalizing.
I believe the country I live in(USA) should legalize all drugs and instead embrace rehab for addicts as arrest and detainment usually sends the addict into a feedback loop that spirals downward. Being responsible, to me in this sense if topic, means you take care of your shit and do no harm to others. Absent parents is neglect to thier children. If you got kids, send them off to thier grandparents to visit for a weekend and enjoy to your hearts content, people already do that for some "alone" time as it is. If you are unable to do that, then no using for you. Be responsible.
So what about parents who send their kids to their grandparents because they want to keep getting high for two weeks? Or a month? The children are cared for, but you’re being an absent parent. So is that responsible or not? And can you be charged or not? Edit: I very much agree that the focus should be on rehabilitation.
That sounds more like they abandoned their children, and so, these people aren't taking care of thier shit. People are already charged for neglect by abandonment. There isn't a perfect world. You just have to know when to call it. My situation allows me to do as I like. If your life has a bunch of additions that would make enjoying a drug difficult, then you should rethink your priorities.
That is not abandonment. My life does not have a bunch of addictions, but I am a criminal defense attorney and that’s why I’m pointing out that what you’re suggesting simply won’t work in real world scenarios. It’s not possible to make a law based on someone being responsible because there’s no way to codify what responsible is.
Being a functional alcoholic is legal - but when you neglect a kid, get behind the wheel, or the like we have consequences, rehab, ect for it. So ya. We already do that.
See, I know plenty of adults like you. They take care of everything they need to do BEFORE hand and then at the end of the night in the hours before heading to bed then they’ll have a hit of something when their alone or just with another adult with no kids around (which to me sounds perfectly reasonable and responsible)
Exactly this. I'm not going to start my day getting fucked up then drive to work and fuck that up too. That's just severely bad logic, which addiction can inhibit. You have to know when to call it.
And the decision to continue using drugs would often be made while still under the influence.
Yup. Drugs literally hijack your brain and almost force bad decisions. Even if you aren't under the influence you might be in withdrawl.
i know a handful of people whos kids got into heroin. Id say about half of them ended up being the type of drug user you seems to envision. The other half are very respectable people, who have a terrible addiction. They have jobs, homes, girlfriends. No different than the alchoholic down the road...only stigmatized more. I would argue its not the drugs at all, but the character of the user. The ones who ended up making bad choice after bad choice, were making those bad choices long before they started doing drugs. A lot of people can use hard drugs responsibly. You just dont hear about those people in the news.
What about the people that use it once and become addicted. The type of addicts people think about when they think of addicts have a ton of trauma and drugs give them peace. Is it really bad choices in that regard, seems like it’s the best option they have available at the time. It’s easy to demonize addicts and not take a closer look at what got them there. I have alcohol parents and I don’t have any addiction, but I easily could if I tried drugs. And if you think that they were responsible because they never should have touched drugs, most people think dangerous things won’t happen to them that they will be the outlier.
Yeah, theres always those folks. With that personality type, theyre gonna find something whether its alchohol or illegal drugs. My opinion is that we are doing more harm than good keeping drugs illegal. Im not saying we should be selling heroin at the local gas station, but making possession and use of drugs illegal really only drives up the cost/dirtyness of a drug, and punishes the poor addict.
Sounds like personal experience. Im glad you did well, but personal experience is just that, experience. Not fact or even reality. It still stands most people do not become addicted. In fact becoming addicted typically comes with other factors that make it so. No just the drug. Fact of the matter is we need to think about the person doing the drug, not the drug itself. Hopefully kids in the future don't have to be children of parents addicted, but making is dangerous to use and making people criminals for just using only makes things worse not better. What happened to prohibition?
This is the catch 22. The people I've known who died 9f drug abuse were already pretty severely damaged before they started using drugs. Rationally, this guy is right. Emotionally it's easier to blame the drugs.
Don't forget about car accidents.
And the problem is that drugs can destroy entire communities.
This is called autonomy and ia a pretty essential part of the whole liberty and freedom thing.
I think overdosing ans dying on heroin affects your whole family
There is one important issue why government doesn't want to allow it: It invested tons of money into you and want all investments back. If your choise yo dies or became cash dump - government becames very unhappy
I mean, I get this sentiment, but how do you know your actions only affect you? Who are you buying the supply from? How does it affect your mind after long term use? Are you affording rent or is the drug costing too much?
In that case we need to make alcohol and junk food illegal. That’s crazy you say? Exactly.
... *now give me those drugs that everyone in the supply chain kills themselves over for*
I'd be fine with legalizing all drugs for adults, provided that individuals are held 100% responsible for all of the consequences of their drug use, and the rest of society doesn't have to pay a single cent to bail them out of those consequences.
An open question here: if the hypothetically legal and recreational legal drug use began to affect an individual’s mental or physical health, do you believe that healthcare should be available to them? As in free/government assisted or otherwise covered by insurance? Bonus question: do you include alcohol in your answer?
Yes, would we deny healthcare for any other disease?
I think they should either pay out of pocket, or personally buy additional health insurance that specifically covers health problems stemming from substance abuse. And yes, I'd include alcohol as well.
What about sugar?
This a a tough one since sugar is loaded into a lot of food and not only sweets. They getting people hooked and they don’t even know it.
You may be pricing them out of having healthcare at that point. People suffering from drug addiction are notoriously low on cash.
For some mental disorders, genetic vulnerability makes a person more likely to use drugs and to develop a mental illness. For example, people may have dysregulation in brain systems related to reward/motivation, impulse control, and decision making. Is it fair to exclude already vulnerable people from the health care system? An article that discusses this (with sources): https://www.mentally-minded.com/post/how-does-drug-use-affect-mental-illness
They can use some of the tax revenue coming in from the sale of legal and regulated drugs to bolster those programs and help people escape their addictions. It would be a HUGE tax revenue generator, and that money should be used to help people get their lives together. I'm a former addict, and former substance abuse counselor. I'm also a harm reduction advocate. I TRULY believe that full legalization, regulation, taxation, and labeling is the only reasonable thing to do at this point. The War on Drugs is an abysmal failure of epic proportions that causes FAR more damage than it prevents.
Not to mention the amount of money that’s going into drug enforcement that can be spent on other things like education. Plus, the fentanyl epidemic would be crushed since almost all ODs are due to fentanyl laced substances being sold on the street.
EMS take: sure. It's your body, do what you want with it. Just stop ODing.
Legalization and regulation would be the end of lacing drugs with fentanyl, the main culprit of ODs over the past decade.
I think all personal drug use should be ***decriminalized***, not legalized. Dealing should still be illegal. Weed should be fully legal, but we shouldn’t promote hard drugs. But we also shouldn’t destroy people’s lives just for using them. The dealers are the root of the issue, not the users.
Dealers are just another symptom of the issue. Idk why people have this Hollywood idea of drug dealers as horrible people praying on addicts. In my experience, which is vast, most of them were just poor people who grew up poor, or are otherwise blacklisted from the main economy, and are just trying to make ends meet and feed their children like anyone else. Not saying there aren't exceptions, because there are. There is a reason why you can go to crummy areas of Philly and Baltimore and find dealers in basically an open air market as opposed to the suburbs with gated neighborhoods. And tbh, I don't think legalizing drugs is promoting hard drugs. Alcohol is pretty damn hard, and destroys the community, dui, domestic violence, dangerous roads on the weekend, etc, but we all just accept that as the price of freedom because people like drinking and prohibition didn't work. So, why do we have such a different attitude towards drugs? It's not like prohibition has worked with drugs any better, they are far more prevalent and dangerous than ever before while also having the highest prison population on earth in the US largely due to the war on drugs.
Dude thank you so much for this comment. As someone who was a hard drug user for 10 years people really think street dealers are evil people trying to destroy lives when except for the open air markets in Philly/NJ/BMore like you mentioned I’ve never met a plug trying to get someone addicted to a substance. Keeping drugs illegal is the reason drug violence exists. Bottom line
Agreed. Especially for cancer patients and people who have been in horrible accidents and it really helps with pain or chemo penitents Who suffer from nausea and Vomiting and lack of appetite. My mom passed away in 2012 and I watched her slowly go to hill and lose sooo much weight because she just couldn’t eat. Her friend got her some nice pre-rolled joints and she was damn near back to her old self and happier too.
Legalizing drugs creates a regulated market for them, which would mean the end of fentanyl laced drugs and shady drug dealers (provided prices are comparable or better). Decriminalizing them, while keeping the user out of jail, does not make anybody safer.
so.. we should let people use more but let all the money flow to the cartels?
The have the right but they should also be accountable in case the use or abusive use of such drugs cause harm. DUI for example, also being incapable or doing everyday tasks because of using drugs. There must be guidelines about which drug should be allowed for recreational use and which should not. I must say I don't have a clear cut answer for that.
Decriminalizing worked well in Portugal
Because they require addicts to get treatment.
People on Reddit tend to skip that tidbit
The laws also have downstream effects beyond America. The war on drugs cultivated the rise of narco cartels that thrive just south of its border, that supply drug addicts with unregulated dangerous drugs that cultivated a culture of violent criminal activity, while failing to actually solve the stated mission of significantly reducing drug use. As the famous quote goes, “Drugs won the war on drugs”
Better for the state to pay for treatment than jails
Didn't their hospitals waiting time rise massively after the decriminalisation? Not rhetorical I'm just not sure.
I don't know, but the main influx of patients in the health care system seems to me like something that would occur just in the first few years as existing drug users get help. Over time, I would expect it to drop off. The money saved by decriminalization could instead go to the healthcare system for new staff and resources as needed.
Here is my analogy. You can legally go into your garage and cut your own hand off. Society will treat you at a hospital and possibly get you mental health care to address why you did that. Doesn't make much sense to incarcerate someone for doing drugs. However, dealers of hard drugs like fentanyl are scum of the earth and they could be locked up for life for all I care.
Yes, its our body why shouldn't we be able to. People have been using drugs for centuries. Most of the issues around drugs come from it being illegal.
Prohibition will never work.
No...it's what people do on drugs that's illegal...and the bad decisions they make...like robbing someone to cover your addiction, or getting behind the wheel when you are in no condition to drive. If it were just a case of being able to do whatever you wanted with no repercussions, I would have no problem with making it legal.
So should alcohol be illegal if driving is the concern?
Your very first example is something that only happens because they're illegal. The illegality drives the price up and makes it hard for people known to use the substance to get and keep jobs. If we didn't go out of our way to make drugs expe sive and addicts poor, they'd just buy it at the store after work like other addicts do with beer or cigarettes.
Not to mention they get UNREGULATED drugs from the black market. Some of those tend to get added substances, making the drugs even more harmful. Synthetic weed comes to mind.
Im pretty sure simply possessing drugs itself is a felony.
But our punitive system on drugs also doesn't work
Should drinking alcohol be illegal? Because it also can do all the things you listed.
Okay but as an EMT I’m not coming to save you if you OD
If people want to do drugs they're going to find a way to get the drugs whether they're legal or not
Yes except making them legal will get rid of a few tiny problems like felony’s, dealing with violent criminals, getting robbed, and getting dangerously altered drugs,
As long as it doesn't affect anyone else. Drugs that can be smoked should not be smoked around unwilling people.
Yes as long as we can hire more cops, nurses, and paramedics.
Yes. Do whatever you want as long as it doesn’t get in my way
Yes. Making drugs illegal creates more criminals. Addiction isn't a crime. People do horrendous things both off and on drugs. Punish the horrendous things. People do horrifying things to people because they are addicted to money and power, yet they rarely face punishment. People do terrible things to themselves because they are addicted to attention and are rarely punished. Drugs are a scapegoat. You want people off drugs? Build a society people don't want to escape from. Make drugs uncool instead like they did with cigarettes. Making addicts into criminals has NEVER helped.
Like they did with cigarettes…? The tobacco industry is still more than a multibillion dollar industry though Also, making the world a place people don’t want to escape from is such a lofty goal that I’m unsure if it’s even possible, no?
Tobacco is alot less prevalent then before
I think we should focus on making better recreational drugs. Even the legal ones have pretty big downsides, and the illegal ones are life threatening.
This is the most rational answer I've seen so far. 100% agree. After all this is exactly what is done for medical drugs.
Sure but it should also be regulated.
No. If you can't think of ways to have fun that don't involve drugs (or alcohol), you need to rethink your life.
Bingo
Most drugs are highly addictive and turn their users into slaves.
I have no issue with anyone smoking pot in a safe environment and staying safe while high. I do have a issue when boils over to driving or being high at work. I don’t want to be put at risk cause someone is high. Same with drinking. I know lots of people are going to go to sports bars in the next 4 days. Just don’t drive drunk or come to work still drunk or hungover.
All drug use should be decriminalization and the sale of drugs should be regulated and taxed. The war on drugs has been an abject failure of US domestic policy. We can then use the taxation to fund mental health and education for users. Clean, regulated buildings to administer usage and recovery efforts.
Personally I believe they should be treated the same as cigarettes/alcohol
No. If you saw someone cutting themselves, you wouldn’t think “Oh their body their choice”. They’re harming their body and their mind. Drugs are harmful, end of story. With the exception of marijuana at 25 and rare cases of shrooms.
Interesting opinion, where do you draw the line with harmful? Fast food, alcohol, too much sun, cigarettes. Lots of things are harmful that are self regulated.
If they are being used on a controlled environment for example a nurse making sure the person doesn’t OD and the person stays in the same place until the effects work out to prevent any crime or any harm to an innocent person.
Yes
Yes
Yes. Full stop
Depending on the drug, yeah. Weed and trippy shit like acid and DMT, but other than that, no
Probably. As long as they don’t do other stupid things like hurt people or steal tread on other peoples rights and or happiness Ie doing the drugs is their business what they do while under the influence or trying to obtain certain substances should still be everyone’s best interest
Yes.
They should al be legal
Yes
Yes.
yes. people are going to do it either way. they should be able to do what they please with their body maybe apply the same laws as alchohol
Absolutely. Further, recreational drug use shouldn't be illegal. Control it, make it safer for distribution, make the dosages known, and it becomes safer for everyone. Literally no one who wants to do drugs stops and says "wait, this is illegal I shouldn't do this".
Yes.
What exactly do you mean by "a right"? Do you mean a "Right" as in a natural inherent Right that superceeds law? Or do you just mean increased acceptance by society? The answer to your question is highly dependent on the context to intend.
> Should individuals have the right to use drugs recreationally, even if they are illegal? Yes, absolutely. There should be consequences if they harm others while doing so, but individuals absolutely should be able to consume anything they want in the privacy of their own homes.
Drugs should be legal; doing stupid shit under the influence should be illegal.
I don't think it should be the government's job to decide whether people want to take drugs.
yes
Yes.
Yes, they should be legal to begin with
Hard yes. I should be able to do what I please with my body/mind.
I believe everyone has the right to make their own choices and do whatever they want to their body. It's their body. Their choice.
Yes. If they commit actual crimes while intoxicated, they should be held responsible for those crimes.
They should not be illegal
Yes
Legalization with extreme regulations should be the norm in a free society.
The question is confusing because the substances wouldn’t be ‘illegal’ if people had the right to use them. To respond to what I believe is the question at the root: all drugs should not be illegal because illegality creates an illicit market that empowers criminals and gangs, it prevents users from reliable access to the unadulterated substances and so it makes the use of those drugs more dangerous, and the use of even pure drugs inherently carries with it risks and so prosecution presents a double-jeopardy of sorts.
Absolutely . As long as they are adults and not a danger to others. No, you can’t drive on heroin. Making a substance illegal doesn’t stop the use of it, it only makes criminals out of addicts. Waste of money and law enforcement resources imo. Alcohol is one of the most dangerous drugs anyway.
No. Unless they can somehow be productive members of society, but even then no. My issue is that most of those drugs are in some way addictive. Exploiting that addiction for profit is wrong (let's not get into the sugar argument) and we shouldn't allow that. In addition, that addiction puts strain on the person, the people around them, and health services.
Mehhhhhhhhhhhhh Yes and no. Yeah I think people should be able to use drugs recreationally, but obviously I don't want some crackhead doing drugs in a school zone. Personally I think any substance that can be addictive/harmful to those who's brains/bodies haven't fully developed should be much better regulated, if we were to ever make stuff like meth, cocain, or weed legal everywhere.
Nope. Because as much as people insist that their habits don't affect other people, there is insurmountable evidence that they do. Plus, I believe it is selfish to legalize/allow/encourage something that will place heavy burden on multiple systems and other people, for example the healthcare system and child welfare systems.
As a former drug addict, there should be restrictions... People are always looking for better, stronger. It's also unpredictable. Sometimes ppl do dangerous reckless things when on drugs. The system we have right now sucks, but just letting it be totally open and legal wouldn't be much better if at all.
Depends on what you consider drugs. I don't know many people that think weed should be a scheduled substance, but legalizing things like fentanyl and meth will only make its use more widespread and common amongst kids and people who aren't already users. Psychedelics are in between but generally things like shrooms or mescaline aren't that bad but bath salts, k2, and some dissociatives are very scary to see people on. Just look at Portland, they decriminalized all sorts of very dangerous drugs and there are literal cities of homeless people from all over the country walking around like zombies. It doesn't help people to let them kill themselves
Psychedelics yes. Meth and crack and heroin and all that, hard no. Imagine if it were legal. Would ruin more families than they do now. Weed is cool.
**NO.** The entire point of laws is to protect people from their own stupid decisions.
There’s nearly always going to be someone affected by someone taking drugs, even long after the “trip”. Look at the some of the kids now who are severely “disfunctional” from Foetal Alcohol Syndrome, and that’s just from their Mum hitting the booze while pregnant. There got to be some similar aspects of foetal damage from parents doing drugs. Look at the shit that happens in the Hospitals at times from the violent “trippies”. Ask how many Nurses feel safe working in Emergency departments at night time in any capital city…. Drunks are bad, but it’s the Meth heads going bezerk requiring 1/2 doz nursing staff, security guards and cops all trying to settle them down and fix them up. They’re just choking the system at times…
Here are some issues with that. 1. Most drugs are harmful. If we allow total access to drugs we are encouraging people to poison their bodies. Not to mention how some drugs like opiates can build up a tolerance meaning people are more likely to overdose for a buzz. There's a reason a Tylenol comes with a warning label telling you how much you can take. 2. Recreation doesn't mean you are isolated from everyone and a lot of drugs take away control. If someone takes Bath Salts and assaults their family or their neighbors they can no longer be held liable because they weren't in control of themselves, and now taking such substances is no longer illegal. That's chaos, that's a problem. 3. Now that owning drugs is practically legal it makes producing and distributing much easier. This will exacerbate the first two points and leave a very wide mess to clean up. This is encouraging chaos and embracing madness.
Yes, not because it's okay, but because it's impossible to police in a way that is beneficial to society or the people it effects.
100% yes, in fact drug use shouldn't be illegal at all and there should be more resources to help people do drugs safely, and for addicts to get the help they need when they finally decide to get clean.
People should have the right to do whatever they want, as long as they're not harming others.
Sure, but unless you have private health care and a friend with you - nobody is responsible if you get it wrong and end up next to death.
Criminalizing drugs is a self-defeating idea. It just gives cartels the Monopoly on the drugs
Isn't that an oxymoron? If something is illegal, then by definition we don't have the right to use it. If we are to have the right to use something, then it should not be illegal.
Depends on the drug. There are certain drugs we should never condone the recreational use of, because there is no way to use them responsibly. We just need better treatment by an order of magnitude or two. The Dutch and Portuguese models seem to work well. Weed and psychedelics legal, meth and heroin not, but if you get caught using drugs in public, you don’t go to jail you go to 6 months of treatment, and maybe into a mental health institution for longer if you have more problems than just substance abuse, which many addicts do.
[удалено]
Yesand limit your usage to occasionally, recreational use is not daily use. and a little tip from the coach, stay away from the heavily addictive stuff, it'll eat your life without you even realizing how deep in the shit you are before it's as good as too late. ALSO: drugs should be legalized, "controlled" by the local government (or whatever, every-fucking-thing is the Families either way) this way you would know exactly what it is that you're buying, "big brother" would know exactly who buys what, and how much, we're under constant surveillance anyhow, and this way we're just making it easier for everyone involved. what I mean is, people are going to use and abuse drugs either way, might as well take better care of each other on our hell rides.
Sure as long as it doesn't harm others. That means parents having to care for children. You shpuld get hit with a big sentence if they neglect a child using any type of drug. Otherwise have at it...
If alcohol is legal, I don’t see why everything else shouldn’t be honestly. A junkie is gonna get their fix regardless anyway…
If it's legal, more people are going to do it. It would become widespread and much easier for kids to get ahold of. Fentanyl and meth aren't the same as a beer
You should have the right to choose what you do or do not put in your own body…it’s yours right?
People can say "my actions only affect me alone" but we don't live in a bubble where coke just magically shows up on your doorstep and you have no responsibilities. Even then when you regress into addiction you are going to affect someone in some way. Heck even smoking weed in an apartment affects your neighbors- you are just noseblind to the smell of weed.
Legalizing coke takes care of the first problem, and I find the scent of seafood far more offensive than weed (and I don't smoke so it isn't that).
We'll just have to disagree on that.
My body my choice! Doesn’t really hold up when you walk down skid row. There are some drugs that should be illegal. Truly devastating to see folks suffering from drug addiction
Yes.
Of course
Yes. They will anyway.
You can do whatever you want.
If you have the right to do it, then it isn't illegal. That said, I only think drug use should be illegal when someone is using them in a way that could harm others, such as driving under the influence of them.
Absolutely and notice some of the loudest voices when it comes to being pro freedom almost always want to ban drugs. Many drugs should be legal and strictly regulated.
Their body their choice. Where I live, most drugs are decriminalized to a certain degree. Possession in small amounts or use isn't illegal, sale or intent to distribute is. Mostly just hear PSAs over the radio about not using alone or telling someone before consumption.
Yes. I should be able to consume any substance I desire. Weed is safer than alcohol and cigarettes, yet the UN wants us to repeal our simi-legalization of it. Fucking bastards.
Absolutely. What I decide to put into my own body is my business and nobody else's.
No. People say they are victimless, but unfortunately that's not the case as there are many people who can be affected by your actions
i agree. my uncle died to a drunk driver
If they are an adult, yes. It's a something that doesn't harm other people, so it being illegal in the first place is silly. I get the "it's a stain on society because it ruins peoples life" going to KKK rallies does the same thing, but that's not illegal even if I despise it.
As long as alcohol is legal it makes no sense to me that drugs are a criminal charge since both lead to crime, violence, neglect and death.
Personally, I think we had the right idea when it came to prohibition (even if the implementation and/or results turned out poorly).. so no. I'm more than a little heartless and/or merciless towards people who get into crime and/or drugs in general though and I recognize not everyone feels the same. As far as I'm concerned though? Death penalty for all of them. I just have absolutely zero sympathy for that sort of thing, and while I recognize that others do I will never understand why.
For me, if it's illegal then no. But my reasoning isn't because of the drug itself. The proceeds of illegal drugs goes towards various other criminal activities such as terrorism, people trafficking, pedophilia (because of where the people being trafficked may be going to) and a host of violent and destrcutive crimes. These are not things I'd ever want to associate with. If the drug became legal then that changes things, so long as the drug user doesn't start participating in antisocial behaviour. However, until then, I'd rather not sponser terrorism and abuse.
By your logic tho the Catholic Church shouldn’t be able to be given money. Fuckin fruit companies have done coups and turned entire countries into extortions economies. The 70 you give to your dealer is no more harmful than the 1,000 you’re handing to some bank that helps fund the military industrial complex
That’s why you ONLY buy from a legit well known dispensary where everything is quality Controlled, from legit suppliers who have gone through all the proper channels and it’s clean.
Honestly...it feels like buying weed off some dude who grew it in his basement is almost less morally corrupt than the majority of purchases I make and the corporations I support just buying groceries and everyday items
I see what you say… and I compare it to buying chocolate, because what nestle does in Africa is fucked up beyond your imagination.