Drug Legalization to save the Economy

With the overwhelming sentiment of the country today as being on the wrong course, as well as the suffering economy; drastic decisions await our leaders in order to get out of this set of challenges we are facing. Millions of brave Americans have fought and died in the name of freedom. Yet, we still have many cases in our country of citizens not granted their full right of freedom and privacy. One would be the current “War on Drugs”. Legalization of illicit drugs is an option we should seriously consider to ensure the future health of our citizen’s rights and our economy.

“A growing body of evidence and opinion suggests that contemporary drug policy, as pursued in recent decades, may be counterproductive and even harmful to the society whose public safety it seeks to protect. This conclusion becomes more readily apparent when one distinguishes the harms suffered by society and its members directly attributable to the pharmacological effects of drug use upon human behavior, from those harms resulting from policies attempting to eradicate drug use.” (N.Y.C.L.A.)

In today’s society, many people look down upon illegal drugs as one of the worst things someone could possibly do. Most people do not realize that in the U.S.A., Aspirin kills just as many people per year as Heroin.(TDP) Many Americans do not realize that Alcohol kills almost 5 times as much as all illicit drug use combined. Several other average Americans do not know that Tobacco kills a little more than 25 times as many people as illicit drug use in the U.S.(DWF)

652,091 people die from heart related health problems in America every year.(CDC) It is true that there are many different foods available that are very bad for your health. But, these unhealthy foods are not illegal for our fellow Americans to eat. Many people know these types of food are bad for them. Yet people still eat the food, because they believe the benefits (the taste of food, feeling full) outweigh the negative aspects (gaining weight, clogged arteries). People have the right to eat whatever they like, even if it is unhealthy for them.

“The common argument is if drugs are legal, won’t more people become addicted? Drugs are only used by people who want to use them. Those who want to try drugs get them most of the time, even if they are illegal. Besides, not everyone smokes cigarettes or drinks vodka just because it is legal. When teenagers have the ability to drink, they usually get drunk. They usually don’t drink one or two beers in moderation. If they had the opportunity to get alcoholic beverages every day, this "ravenous hunger" would decrease very fast.” (*Lopa)

“There is evidence that many illicit drugs pose comparatively fewer health dangers than certain licit drugs (e. g. alcohol and tobacco). In the UK, an average of 500,000 people take ecstasy every weekend, 40 million are social drinkers, 11 million are "at risk" or "problem" drinkers, and 9 million smoke cigarettes, resulting in 40 ecstasy-related deaths a year, 6500 deaths due to alcohol and 120,000 deaths due to smoking, making the per user risk of ecstasy half that of alcohol (about 1:12,500 occasions, compared to 1:6,153 for alcohol), and much below tobacco (1:75).”(McKenna)

“Some say Drugs are not good in general, so why legalize? Sure, drugs can wreck people’s lives, but not wearing a seatbelt, bad investments, poor diet, unemployment, and being homeless can do that too. Many times, being a responsible drug user can be hazardous because of the stereotype attached, and can lead into several of the previously mentioned scenarios. EVERY drug has negative aspects, starting from cigarettes, to crack, to aspirin. But just as good drugs have some good sides, so do bad drugs. Everyone knows that drinking alcohol can make you addicted to it, but everybody knows too that this does not happen with a glass of wine for dinner. It always depends on the amount, the frequency of the use of the drug itself. Smoking marijuana once a month will not make you fall over dead. The percentage of alcohol is measured and printed on almost every bottle so everyone knows how much he or she can drink without being drunk. With the illegal drugs is this of course impossible, because it is also illegal to have it tested. “(*Lopa)

Another point is that everyone should have the right to know for themselves, what is good or bad for them. Some think it is okay to relax with a drug, some do not. As long as they do not harm anyone, and just want to have a nice evening at home; people should let them decide by themselves. No one person should rule another person's life based on their tastes. People can drink, smoke, take prescription drugs, drink coffee, and energy drinks, and then eat a few super-extra-ultra-value meals. We can do all that in one day, yet it is illegal for you to smoke a substance (less harmful to your body than aspirin) in your living room, after a long day at work. You have the freedom to do all “these drugs”, but not “those drugs”. Zero people die from marijuana use in our country and around the world. Why is it so demonized? Why aren’t sugar, caffeine, and nicotine known gateway drugs? People should be able to do what they wish with their bodies, as long as they are not doing harm to anyone else.


Many people believe legalization of drugs would lead to a reduction in crime. Legalization would make our streets and homes safer, in relation to the reduction of the retail cost. It would also be safer from gangs fighting over drug and turf wars. It would put an end to prison overcrowding by freeing almost half of our prison population. “It would unclog the court system, simply by wiping hundreds of thousands of non-violent cases off the court dockets.”(Totse) Legalization would save lots of taxpayer money, an estimated 100 billion dollars a year by Steven Duke. We could also create more jobs in the form of growers, inspectors, and pharmacy technicians. Legalization of illicit drugs should be treated the same as alcohol. It should be tested, regulated, labeled, and taxed. The proper age of someone to be eligible to purchase is up for debate. People should also have to follow the same driving laws under the influence of any moderately strong drug the same way, or slightly harsher than the current alcohol and driving laws.

Many people seem to have forgotten that we have tried and gone through prohibition before. Prohibition did not really work out for us then, and with illegal drugs it is not working for us now. One of the lessons one could learn from prohibition is that you cannot deny a man something that makes him feel good, and hurts no one else but him. When you deny that, you only make him want it more than he would were it readily available. Let the people who want to do drugs, do them.

We spend $3,168 a second on the war on drugs.(Duke) We could probably spend a third of that for prevention and treatment of drug abuse. We are in very tough financial times. It appears we could greatly reduce our National debt, and stop working to demonize those who choose a safer drug than alcohol. There are responsible drugs users out there. Most people unknowingly meet one almost every day. We are promised life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Let’s hold our Government to that promise and help our country as a result of it.

< Obama Gives Berlusconi the Respect He Deserves | Should the Arctic meltdown be exploited for petroleum? >
 Display:
a month or two ago.  It makes too much sense to actually happen, and in fact some economists say that we should rebuild afghanistan using their poppy trade, rather than trying to burn off the only thing they're growing right now.  Poppies get used to make morphine, so the drugs would actually be used in hospitals, not in the gutter somewhere.  Also, Amstredam has proven that legalization does not ruin the drug market, and in fact weed is more expensive there than here because of taxing, and we have basically the same genetics.

Chris

by chrisandyasemin on 11/17/2008 10:39:55 AM EST

Everyone that thinks this can't happen....

Many people thought we would never have a Black President.

by diglass on 11/18/2008 06:57:28 PM EST

[ Parent ]

A lot of us have been saying the same thing since the "War on Drugs" was first declared.

Government propaganda is a powerful thing - they can lie with impunity then use their own lies to support their side of the argument. We have yet to have either a head of the DEA or a "Drug Czar" who sees the issue as anything but criminal.

As far as income goes, the government is doing just fine, thank you, with confiscations and selling off of same - not to mention fines handed down by judges. As long as they get theirs, they don't care a whole lot about reality or long term effects of the "War" on society.

And when you add the liquor and Big Pharma lobbys fighting legalization every step of the way - well, let's just say there are formidable opponents to logic...

by MedfordTim on 11/17/2008 11:04:02 AM EST

The increasingly privatized prison industry. You know why we have more people behind bars in this country than any other country in the world.

Of course we'd be much, much better off pumping tax money (from legalized drugs) into things to benefit society overall (schools, public transportation, drug treatment, etc.) but the select few would rather pump it into their own pockets and the pockets of their friends in private industry.


And of course we SPEND a shitload of money on the "war" on drugs...man, if we could turn that expenditure into a profit, the benefits could be tremendous.

PS---What does everyone think about gambling as a method for increasing revenue? There are pros and cons obviously.

by Tom Hanc on 11/17/2008 02:01:48 PM EST

[ Parent ]
it brings in outside income, but at the cost of bankrupting the local communities.  In French lick Indiana, either you work at the casino, or at the hotel next to the casino.  The whole town is basically poor, and the casino traffic there is a pitiful looking group of people most of the time.  I fully condone gambling, I just don't think it's a feasable way of generating revenue in poorer areas, because idiots end up gambling away their earnings.  It's not the casino's fault, it's just unreasonable to think that a person won't go to a casino that pops up next to them, because a casino represents the poor man's instant ticket to wealth.  You ever wonder why so many poor people play the lottery every day?

Chris

by chrisandyasemin on 11/17/2008 02:11:13 PM EST

[ Parent ]
but is there any good analysis on how communities with gambling have been effected?

I'm just curious.


PS---There was just a lotto raffle in IL not long ago, and 4 people are millionaires. I always wonder why I never meet anyone who's won the lotto. I know, the odds suck but the fact is that *someone* wins every week or two...way more often if you include our "Little Lotto" actually.

by Tom Hanc on 11/17/2008 03:13:01 PM EST

[ Parent ]

Gambling can literally ruin people's lives because it can be as addictive as drugs or alcohol to some people.

Your point on prisons is a good one. and so depressing.

by desertpear on 11/17/2008 02:21:20 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Devil's Advocate just PM'd me and said that part of the gambling revenue would go toward gambling treatment, just like some of the legalized rug money would go toward drug addiction treatment.

Come to think of it, if you read what you just wrote you essentially killed the argument for legalizing drugs as well. Or did I miss something?

by Tom Hanc on 11/17/2008 03:06:42 PM EST

[ Parent ]
it's just that we have to be careful where we legalize and introduce these substances.  If the communities are already downtrodden, these solutions will only hurt them, where as if these are introduced into a place like Boston, where the middle class will survive, the effects won't be as negative, and there may be beneficial rewards to legalizing drugs/gambling.  It's kind of a case by case basis, but it's hard to say where the threshold is for determining when a community is "stable enough".  I would propose that smaller communities farm the drugs, and the larger communities would be where they get legally traded, because the revenue of production would affect everyone that way, and the farmers would have it the cheapest, and they would get the most profit in the situation, serving to bring the smaller communities up to being more profitable almost instantly, and then not having the effects of high drug costs hitting them.  Drugs ruin people's lives a lot of times because they're expensive, and people are stupid and sell their things to get drugs.  FUCK THOSE PEOPLE.  We're concerned with the adults that act responsibly, because adults will get drugs legally or not, so we need to concern ourselves with figuring out legal methods to control this, and make a profit at the same time.  Addiction is a genetic trait, and people will always choose their vice.  Not to say that some drugs are not addictive, but you look at Amstredam, and the average age of heroin users has declined a year every year, meaning at some point there ceased to be an interest in heroin by the youth, and one day heroin usage in that country will be next to nothing.  The taboo is sometimes more exciting than the drug(i.e. underage drinking).

Chris

by chrisandyasemin on 11/17/2008 04:49:18 PM EST

[ Parent ]
And I laugh at the idea that if hard-core drugs were suddenly legal that everyone would rush to use them.

Things like mushrooms I could maybe see, but really, is the average non-drug using person going to rush out and say "all right, give me a Lotto, the new Playboy oh, and a bag of heroin please".

But that's how a lot of people think it would be.

by Tom Hanc on 11/17/2008 05:03:02 PM EST

[ Parent ]
the fore fathers got one thing extremely right in protecting the country from the will of the masses.

Chris

by chrisandyasemin on 11/17/2008 05:57:17 PM EST

[ Parent ]

Cannabis is not an addictive drug.

I meant harmful drugs like meth, crack cocaine, cocaine, and heroin. I'm not sure how I feel about legalization of those drugs.

Seems like just recently I read about a country that treats criminal drug addicts with time in rehab rather than prison. I would support a program like this 100%. I don't think prison time is going to help anyone who has drug problems.

by desertpear on 11/17/2008 06:24:31 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I think at the very least Pot should be legalized and taxed while the hard drugs should be decriminalized.  That treatment programs sounds like it makes a LOT more sense.

Instead of using our tax dollars to arrest, try and imprison people (which means food, shelter and 24 hour babysitters, not to mention healthcare) how about we use some of it to provide job/life training for at risk populations? Tie it in with improving education and fighting gangs crime since these issues are often tied together (black market, etc.).

It's complicated but come on, what we're doing now SUCKS.

by Tom Hanc on 11/17/2008 06:35:16 PM EST

[ Parent ]
the first question to Pres. Obama concerning this subject is will he remove cannabis from the controlled substance list?  The uses for hemp are many from energy, to food, to textile and paper, so why does a small group of religious fundamentalists call the tune just because cannabis threatens their views on spirtuality?

by gatekeeper50 on 11/17/2008 11:14:52 AM EST

Obama has already made it clear that he not only is not interested in legalizing drugs or Hemp. he is also against Medical Marijuana.

Don't expect any progress in this area. If it happens, be happily surprised - I know I will be.

by MedfordTim on 11/17/2008 11:21:26 AM EST

[ Parent ]
back in 04, that was one of his talking points. http://stash.norml.org/2008 /02/13/barack-obama-and-mar ijuana/ http://stopthedrugwar.org/c hronicle_blog/2008/feb/01/n evermind_barack_obama_wants _to_ One would assume he had to switch positions to win, but with the state of the economy, we don't have many options.

by diglass on 11/17/2008 12:46:33 PM EST

[ Parent ]

I don't think this will happen under an Obama presidency, although more states may pass medical marijuana laws, which would be a good thing.

I think certain issues may be particularly difficult for the first African American president to support, given the existence of people just waiting to associate him with drugs to tear him down, like our resident propagandist from TX. Why do you hate America, Ken? Are you unwilling to support the Commander in Chief just because he is black? Are Republicans willing to let America go down the tubes the next four years out of spite and sour grapes? Isn't that a little unpatriotic?

I don't know much about marijuana laws, but how much of this can be decided on a state-by-state basis, or even at the county or city level? I know some cities direct their police force to not pursue small-time marijuana crime, in order to prioritize violent crime.

Anti-cannabis laws are such a joke. Perhaps the continued discovery of its medical benefits will eventually allow it to be legalized.

by desertpear on 11/17/2008 02:30:47 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I'd like to think that (knock on wood) if Obama gets a second term, that he could be much more ambitious.

Partly because he doesn't have to worry about re-election and partly because the country would presumably be in a much better situation relative to now.

by Tom Hanc on 11/17/2008 03:02:55 PM EST

[ Parent ]
why should he even worry about getting re-elected a second time, i mean if he wanted to really make shake things up, he could sacrafice a secured second term and make some intense changes that aren't thinking about political gain, and strictly based on necessity.  It's a long shot, but I think the part of Obama that is not a politician might make some huge leaps.  The question is, what percentage is barack obama politician?  After this election, I would say at LEAST %50, and that means a %50 chance of change.  That's much better than the 5% of McCain.

Chris

by chrisandyasemin on 11/17/2008 03:23:29 PM EST

[ Parent ]
There are two reasons why he'd wait until the second term:

1)-We have no money and the economy sucks. That makes it much harder to generate the revenue needed to make some of the big and much needed changes.

2)-These things take time and he might need to lay some groundwork first.

Don't get me wrong, I realize that these things can both be used as poor excuses to keep things the same forever.

by Tom Hanc on 11/17/2008 03:29:48 PM EST

[ Parent ]
If he doesn't shake things up and do things differently, I believe he will have a much harder time getting re-elected into a second term.

by diglass on 11/17/2008 03:42:02 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I agree that if public perception is that Obama was just another politician, it's disastrous.

At the same time if he seriously pushed for legalizing drugs, the Dems would be finished in 2012. It'd still be incredibly risky for the overall party in a second term, but *if* the public perception was that Obama made some good changes and the country was much better off than it was when he took office...

You get the idea.

by Tom Hanc on 11/17/2008 03:56:38 PM EST

[ Parent ]
i heard laura used to be a dealer...

maybe arnie...arnie used to LOVE pot

by chrisandyasemin on 11/17/2008 01:12:51 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Bush was into cocain


by Chinese Democracy on 11/17/2008 02:37:19 PM EST

[ Parent ]
The big O would have to do a lot of catching up to come anywhere NEAR my consumption over the years.

How cool would it be to kick back in the Lincoln bedroom and light up a fattie? Wheee!

by MedfordTim on 11/17/2008 03:20:52 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I'm glad Obama at least owned up to it.  I'm sick of all these presidents who deny their youthful interests in substances, because that's part of having a rebellious mind:when some people are giving you strange reasons as to why a drug would harm you, it's up to you to try it out and see if they are lying.  Anyone who has never tried an illegal substance is "drinking the kool-aid".  I'm not saying go try heroin, and I have never done heroin or anything like that and never will, but when you have a government saying alcohol is fine, but marijuana is "dangerous", then a red flag should go off in your head and say, something about this regulation isn't right.  And if you don't at least get to that realization, then you'll never truly have a free mind.

Chris

by chrisandyasemin on 11/17/2008 04:53:32 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I swear, the times when i try to start arguments out of fun, i never get a response...it's almost like ken knows that republicans smoke weed and do drugs too...

Chris

by chrisandyasemin on 11/17/2008 07:17:15 PM EST

[ Parent ]
junkie is a junkie in denile. see bush.
 

by holy noize on 11/18/2008 12:08:02 AM EST

[ Parent ]
now there you go making a fun conversation all charged.  That's a completely baseless statement except for the fact that there's a stereotype that "black people use crack, and white people use coke".  Where is this Reasonable suspicion for crack use?  Admission of coke use (not extensive use by the way) is NOT admitting crack usage.  Marion Berry used crack.  That's suspicion for past crack use.  I would not assume Marion Berry smoked weed, so why should we assume that Obama smoked crack?  So are you suggesting W smoked crack too?  Because he and laura put back A HELLUVA lot more blow than Obama could have.  Is that what you're saying?  Or is Obama the ONLY crack smoker in this equation?

Chris

by chrisandyasemin on 11/18/2008 05:29:42 PM EST

[ Parent ]
just as much as i don't have a problem with W's coke use.  If you read my WHOLE post above, you will see that I embraced the acknowledgement of drug use in the youthful days, and see it as a plus.  To quote your idol,"The smear stops here".  If i cared so much about a little weed smoked i the past, I wouldn't have voted for Obama, so why would you think I'm DEFENDING his use.  It doesn't need to be defended.

Chris

by chrisandyasemin on 11/18/2008 12:44:15 AM EST

[ Parent ]
the government will never legalize drugs because it is one of their biggest suppliers

Police Officers, DAs, Public defenders, judges. The entire system is a patronage haven for both sides. Patronage helps the local party maintain its grip on goverment. At the same time private companies also drink from the same well.

Yes legalization would make sense on several levels, it would save tax dollars, it would save lives, it would put drug dealers out of business, it would increase tax revenues, it would ensure treatment for all addicts, it would even improve relations with foreign countries.

It simply makes to much sense.

by LORD FOUL on 11/17/2008 03:52:04 PM EST

It doesn't help when dopey druggy types talk about legalization.

I think many protests and efforts are completely discredited and undermined by the dopey appearance/presentation of those involved.

It might sound absurd, but it's completely true. There's no better way to turn off the majority of people (particularly older, conservative types) that need to be convinced (that the war is wrong, that drugs should be legalized, etc.) than to show up with a bunch of piercings, out of control and or colored head/facial hair and tattoos blazing.

Comb that hair, po-lice that moo-stache, take out the piercings, cover up those tats and put on a suit and tie for Christ's sake. And don't use slang and don't yell obnoxious slogans when the cameras show up. Speak clearly and intelligently.

If protesters adopted that policy they're efforts would be 50%* more effective. Just imagine the press coverage that would result from thousands of people wearing suits (and or nice button up shirts tucked into slacks with a tie...even if it comes from the thrift store).



*Number I pulled out of my ass, but you get the point.

by Tom Hanc on 11/17/2008 04:04:49 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Very good point, but how many people at a average anti abortion rally are dressed in suits?

by diglass on 11/17/2008 04:10:00 PM EST

[ Parent ]
The audience is different though. And the media is terrified of pissing off the rabid pro-life crowd.

On the other hand they're just find with marginalizing and dismissing the anti-war, pro-legalization crowd.

by Tom Hanc on 11/17/2008 04:16:31 PM EST

[ Parent ]
although money talks more than appearance.  What would really work is if a bunch of weed dealers got together, and got say $100 million dollars in cash, and brought it to the government and said "Look, we can make this from plants"...they could be wearing flip flops and sunglasses for all the government cares, but that's what needs to happen, but the pot community is not organized enough to ever do that.  The money is undoubtedly there, but not altogether.

Chris

by chrisandyasemin on 11/17/2008 04:56:47 PM EST

[ Parent ]
would help change public perception.

Once public perception leaned further to the desirable direction, people could work on the farm lobbyists to lobby Congress.

And then take it from there. Hey, the farmers stand to make tons of money, and they have influence! The tricky part is removing the special interests of the privatized prison industry IMO. That's a HUGE financial vested interest/road block. Why would they want something that would cost them billions of dollars each year?

by Tom Hanc on 11/17/2008 05:06:27 PM EST

[ Parent ]
 Display: