Is it time all illegal drugs are legalised?

That does not answer the question of regulation. I very much doubt the government is capable and savvy enough to objectively regulate the use of drugs.

I don't understand what difference it makes that a drug's natural, it's the effect the drug has on someone that's important, not how it is made...

hope you like my long one

X

Why do you think legalising drugs would prevent human traffickers from using them to enslave their victims?

You can say that the majority of people would use it responsibly, but I don't think that's adequate reason to legalise the drug. If it ruins the lives of 10% of the people who use it, that's thousands of people we're talking about.

I would be more at risk of falling victim to a drug-induced or related crime or accident.

Administer an anti-psychotic.

Potentially harmful side effects for a drug of such low toxicity (lsd).

look at the chemical in manifactured drugs
arsenic
petrol
are just a couple of thing but organically grown stuff has no chemicals so therefore has a safer effect in the long term scheme of things

Looking back I think human trafficking is actually a weak point; I should have said that legalization of drugs could reduce drug gangs/cartels overall since they might lose the lucrative prices that they could originally sell drugs at which is usually their main source of income. As a result, funding for activities such as human trafficking in the sex slave could potentially go down, resulting in fewer sex workers being trafficked [potentially, I'm not sure but I would be interested in more information]. Also, if the drugs are regulated, then arguably individuals who bought drugs to placate/enslave victims could be traced, but I'm sure they would get around that in some way or another.

Why?

Biology is a form of very complicated chemistry. Organically grown products contain millions of chemicals. When you take a drug, whether it's organically grown or artificially synthesised, the chemicals in the drug interact with the chemicals in your brain to create the desired effect. They can do it through different pathways, but it's all the same basic idea.

true but i was talking about the direct harm of manufactured drugs thats to the chemical present within them

Yeah. And the direct harm that many organic drugs can cause is due to the naturally occurring chemicals they contain, too. It's less useful to draw a distinction than you might think.

My issue with the 'war on drugs' is not so much the legalisation issue but more the regulation should it be legalised. Who will regulate it? Should there be taxation? If so, why?

It could mean that my children in the future have easy acces to things which could kill them, for one thing. If it was legal, people could do them before working or during work and give customers risky services, another thing. There are quite a few ways.

The pro-pegalisation argument isn't weak but it is too full of this: "how does it affect you?" *******s.

But they don't? Smoking - okay, what, long term possibility of lung and mouth cancers. Cocaine? Bye-bye nasal cavity, bladder control, healthy heart function, and in some cases, mental health.

Alcohol: in moderation does nothing too bad? Sometimes it can even be healthy to have a glass if wine or whatever, I just do not see the comparison.

I do get that all three cause harm but I hate the comparison.

There are some genuinely dangerous drugs around so we certainly shouldn't legalise everything, but drugs that have been demonstrated to be minimally harmful in comparison to already legal drugs such as alcohol should of course be legalised. There is no rational basis on which to maintain the illegal status of drugs like Cannabis if you're going to keep alcohol legal. The only reason why they haven't been decriminalised is because of political point-scoring by appearing "hard on drugs" which is apparently a favourable stance to conservatives who aren't very interested in looking at the medical evidence. The fact that the Government drug adviser Professor David Nutt was sacked for simply stating this evidence shows how ridiculous this whole affair is.

The solution to drugs misuse isn't banning them, but educating people and fostering a culture of sensible use.

Legalising drugs is a good way to take the market out of the hands of criminals. Prohibition didn't work with things like alcohol, and it doesn't work with drugs either. The illegal drugs trade is linked to all sorts of other crimes as well - some crimes such as robbery are done by individuals fuelling their addiction, and some drugs are even linked to terrorist groups. Legalisation could undercut this.

Alcohol and tobacco are legal and widely accepted (in that hardly anyone wants them totally banned, even if some want more restrictions on them). So anyone justifying prohibition on health grounds is a hypocrite if they don't want things like alcohol and tobacco to be made illegal as well.

You've got the potential tax benefits as well. You could have a decent tax on it and still be able to undercut the criminal drugs trade.

Above all, if you're doing something in a way which does not impact anyone else, such as using drugs for your own personal use in your own home, what right does the state have to stop you from doing it? I could get into trouble if I just grow my own cannabis plant in my home and only use it at home, which just strikes me as ridiculous moral puritanism. The personal liberty argument is a big one.

This is why I feel drugs should not be legal. People can't drink responsibly so imagine if they got their hands on LSD. Thirty people arrive in A&E having a nightmare trip for no damn reason (they could of got everythng right, set, setting, dosage, trip sitter) and it can still go wrong. What do you do then? What is a doctor or nurse going to do?

I just think we don't need to add more chemicals to the mix.

@ivybridge