Legalize how far, if at all?

[vakkotaur]

I've been pondering writing this entry, or one like it, for a while. An entry about drugs, except I kept realizing I only have two data points, really, and those seem to disagree.

While there is plenty of literature on the subject of the 'War On Drugs' there is nothing that seems to really enlighten with an "Aha! Yes, *THAT* is the way to handle things!" conclusion.

The range is from those who claim that all chemicals illegal now should be, and perhaps even a few more, to those who call for legality of every chemical (save for outright toxins, such as nerve agents and such). Each side actually does have its points. On the "Keep 'em illegal" side, all chemicals can be misused. On the "Legalize 'em all" side, there is personal freedom and responsibility and if you misuse something it is (or should be) your damn fault for doing that. In between, and there is such a place, though it seems unpopulated - perhaps only because nobody there is as loud, there is a possibility of a middle road. Ah, but just where to build that road?

I can see some things truly should be off-limits. That those who first made methcathinone abandoned it as being too dangerous for medical use says something, for example. The chemicals, for the most part, have an effect of intoxication, thus leading to problems (which already exist) of operating 'under the influence.' And would legalization lead to increased (ab)use? "Hey, it's legal, so it must be okay." The major benefit of legalization seems to be to remove money, and hopefully crime, from the production and distribution. I can see the advantage of that - but I can also see a cost in more (ab)users acting more publicly.

My two conflicting data points: I have met, in my past, a few folks who used illegal drugs. Two stand out. I'll simply call them User1 and User2. I went to High School with User1 and his friends. The two of us lived not too far apart (maybe as far as a mile - in the country, that's close and it was a short bicycle ride) and so I saw him often after school, on weekends, and in the Summer. When I first met him he was already smoking tobacco and drinking alcohol and expressed an interest in marijuana, at least. Also, when I first met him he was as average as average could get, at least as far as schoolwork. His report card was straight Cs with two exceptions, a B and D that balanced. He, through his other friends, did eventually try and kept on using marijuana. And other things. One friend of his went as far as sniffing gasoline, or so it was said. User1 was a habitual user and his grades reflected it. He showed me what may have been his last report card. All Fs save one D, as I recall. A GPA of 0.0-something. The last time I talked to him - and it was the last - he said he was speeding. That was I didn't want to see him again. Last I heard, which was years ago now, he had married a girl he got pregnant -- someone he once said he'd have nothing to do with.

User2 I met in college. In fact, he was my roommate for a while. He smoked (but not in our room, I made it very clear that would Not Happen, Or Else) and he drank alcohol. He was probably alcoholic. As he explained it, "I don't have to have the first drink, but once I have it, I have to have the next one." He told me his "Theory of Drinking" which was if you were going to drink any more than a light buzz, get good and drunk. That way, his reasoning went, when you went to bed you'd fall asleep instantly rather than watching the room spin. He smoked marijuana, so he told me (and I had no reason not to believe him about that). This he did on Friday or Saturday nights with his RPG buddies and such. I don't recall him ever acting odd or saying he did anything during the week. He did take his studies seriously. Also, he had seen some folks one night who tried LSD and that scared him. I recall him saying there was no way he'd try that as it messed a person up. "You can tell 'em ANYTHING and they'll act like it's profound. The sky is blue. Two plus two is five. Anything. And they'll go 'Yeah....'"

Knowing of User1 and User2, one would think perhaps that the problem is 'addictive personality' or such, yet it was User2 who was alcoholic, or had the tendencies, that managed use better.

Oh, and since you may be wondering, no, I didn't try marijuana, smoked or otherwise. This was by my choice, not lack of opportunity, and even User1 and his friends respected that choice, amazing as that is. I was not pressured.

This all leaves me wondering, which path would be the best to follow for a drug policy? The only conclusion I can come to is not a very satisfying one: I simply don't know.

Comments

[shelbystripes.livejournal.com]

I think it's just a personal-responsibility thing, really. I mean, there are alcoholics and people that drink way too much, but we don't make the stuff illegal (we learned why that didn't work the hard way); there are chain smokers, but tobacco's legal (though it really should be barred from indoor places where the smoke can build up, or at least, places without really good ventilation). People who abuse either of those, well, it's their responsibility to get help and find a way out. This is supposed to be a nation that's all about personal responsibility, supposedly.

Which is why the War on Drugs makes so little sense to me. I say, legalize marijuana. Put the stuff into cigarettes and sell it right next to tobacco. You''ll end up with some chain smokers, but you'll also end up reducing the amount of crime involved in getting the stuff, and stop having to worry about the taxpayer expenses of locking away people whose worst offense was just having lit up. Make sure the legal age is something like 18 or 21 and make sure there's stiff penalties for selling the stuff to kids. It's always gonna be out there; may as well make it legal and get the tax money off of it.

I went to a play production of "Reefer Madness", based off the famous movie of the same name, and the show's program had some interesting discussion about hemp rising as an alternative means of producing all sorts of things cheaply, including paper, in the early 20th century, and hype concerning the ill effects of marijuana use being created and played up by the media at the request of various corporations that had large investments in existing paper production and other things that would be threatened by hemp-based products. And if you look at the allegations that were made back then, well, just watch Reefer Madness sometime. I know there are people who abuse the stuff and it affects them negatively, but I have never, ever heard of anyone going crazy and killing somebody in a marijuana-induced rampage. It just doesn't happen.

Of course, beyond marijuana, there's the question of the harder drugs. That kind of stuff, well, maybe it should be legalized in very strict fashions, since people will end up using it either way too, but make sure the sale of it is still very limited (marijuana cigarettes could be sold at any convenience store, but, well, maybe have the harder stuff limited to sale in licensed bars where minors aren't even allowed to go in, and strict limits on how much they're allowed to sell a person at a time.)

Sure, there will always be people who abuse those kind of things. But this is a country supposedly based on freedom and individual liberty, and as long as people can do the stuff without it hurting anyone (which is possible), they should be free to do it. And legalization would greatly reduce the amount of crime and criminals in the country; if you make the stuff legal, and affordable through commercialization, you'll lower the number of people who commit crime to be able to buy the stuff, let alone eliminating the number of people who go to jail merely for owning the stuff, even if they bought it with their own hard-earned money.

Just my thoughts. I don't think it's a perfect solution, but there isn't such a thing. I think this solution is, however, better than the one we have now.

[vakkotaur.livejournal.com]

User1 actually suggested something that might be an idea for the harder drugs. It was, in essence, an opium den. A person would go such a place to do some drug much as a person goes to a bar to drink. He even went so far as to suggest this be set up with a sort of hotel arrangement (perhaps a doctor around, just in case?) so that one would have to come down/sober up before leaving. An interesting idea. Not sure it'd be workable.