Debate: Should recreational drug use be a criminal offense?

"hardcore drugs like cocaine, meth, marijuana, ect."

lol

To answer your question, no, of course not.

Marijuana, definitely not. I dunno about the others.

So long as you're not hurting anyone or putting anyone else in danger you should be able to do what you want with your own body behind closed doors.

I'm not talking about tobacco or alcohol, but illegal drugs like cocaine, meth, marijuana, etc.chrisredfield3

I see you've edited your post to say "illegal" instead of "hardcore" once people pointed out how much more deadly and addictive alcohol and tobacco are than marijuana.

But now your question makes no sense. You're asking "should illegal drugs be illegal?" Tautologically, illegal drugs must be illegal, or they are not illegal drugs at all.

So a better question might be, "how do we decide whether a drug should be legal or not?" And the answer is to compare policies throughout history, and pick the one with the greatest net benefit and the smallest net harm. If you compare the overall effects of prohibition, regulation, and complete legality, it's pretty clear that focusing on regulation (age limits, drugged driving laws, etc.), education and treatment is the best policy, even for very harmful drugs.

I would recommend that policy even for heroin and crystal meth (which I would advice everyone to competely avoid), because it yields the greatest net benefit to society. Locking people in prison for their habits is much more expensive and harmful than education and treatment. It's important to keep in mind that current US drug policies are not deterring drug use. Illegal drug use continues to increase in America, whereas it has dropped in countries (like Portugal) that have decriminalized drug posession.

If you are an idealist rather than a pragmatist, you may reject that answer and suggest that there is a moral imperative to outlaw dangerous drugs. Your question then becomes "how do we set the threshold that determines which drugs are too dangerous?" A statistician would be the best person to answer that question, but any reasonable threshold would result in marijuana being legal (zero annual deaths, overdose impossible, less physically addictive than caffeine, no major chronic diseases caused, no increase in violent behaviour) and alcohol being illegal (hundreds of thousands of annual death, overdose common, extremely severe withdrawal for addicts, major cause of liver disease, massively contributes to sexual assault, domestic abuse, homicide and suicide).

I think hardcore drugs should be criminal still.

I think hardcore drugs should be criminal still.

howlrunner13

Those of you saying hardcore drugs should be illegal, how do you determine which drugs are 'hardcore' and therefore illegal?

Death rates, addiction rates, capacity for overdose?

[QUOTE="chrisredfield3"]I'm not talking about tobacco or alcohol, but illegal drugs like cocaine, meth, marijuana, etc.XenonRadon

I see you've edited your post to say "illegal" instead of "hardcore" once people pointed out how much more deadly and addictive alcohol and tobacco are than marijuana.

But now your question makes no sense. You're asking "should illegal drugs be illegal?" Tautologically, illegal drugs must be illegal, or they are not illegal drugs at all.

So a better question might be, "how do we decide whether a drug should be legal or not?" And the answer is to compare policies throughout history, and pick the one with the greatest net benefit and the smallest net harm. If you compare the overall effects of prohibition, regulation, and complete legality, it's pretty clear that focusing on regulation (age limits, drugged driving laws, etc.), education and treatment is the best policy, even for very harmful drugs.

I would recommend that policy even for heroin and crystal meth (which I would advice everyone to competely avoid), because it yields the greatest net benefit to society. Locking people in prison for their habits is much more expensive and harmful than education and treatment. It's important to keep in mind that current US drug policies are not deterring drug use. Illegal drug use continues to increase in America, whereas it has dropped in countries (like Portugal) that have decriminalized drug posession.

If you are an idealist rather than a pragmatist, you may reject that answer and suggest that there is a moral imperative to outlaw dangerous drugs. Your question then becomes "how do we set the threshold that determines which drugs are too dangerous?" A statistician would be the best person to answer that question, but any reasonable threshold would result in marijuana being legal (zero annual deaths, overdose impossible, less physically addictive than caffeine, no major chronic diseases caused, no increase in violent behaviour) and alcohol being illegal (hundreds of thousands of annual death, overdose common, extremely severe withdrawal for addicts, major cause of liver disease, massively contributes to sexual assault, domestic abuse, homicide and suicide).

This is an excellent post. I tip my hat to you for a very logical and concise argument against our current, ridiculous drug prohibition laws.

To answer the TC: I am a bit uneasy about cocain, meth and pcp. These drugs, almost without fail, turn the user in to a danger to society because they can, and often do, make you violent. But ultimately, its not about what you ingest or otherwise put in your body, its about the consequences of those actions. If the only harm done is to yourself, then no criminality should be attached. If, on the other hand, you wind up hurting someone else, the punishment should be more severe than if you had not intoxicated yourself. Kind of like drunk driving is now. If you are sober and have an accident, you will most likely not be put in jail. But, if you are intoxicated and have the exact same accident, then the punishment will be more severe, as it should be.

Absolutely not marijuana! Putting pot in the same sentence as heroin, cocaine and methamphetamies is stupidly rediculous and everyone should know this by now (unless the government propaganda actually worked on you). Legalize marijuana, that should be the very first step.

I think hardcore drugs should remain illegal. The problem is the definition of hardcore drug. I think more and more people don't believe marijuana should earn that definition.

With harder drugs, yes. But, I don't think you should get jail time. More like community service........just the community service is rehab. lol

Marijuana should be legal. As for cocaine, I suppose it could be if there weren't too many problems, but I think there would be so ultimately I say just tobacco, alcohol, and weed should be legal and not the others.

Yes because they are illegal and therefore a criminal offense.

Personally I believe all drugs should be legal and regulated. Their criminalaity certainly hasn't stopped people from using them and has only brought more harm than good. Legalize them, let corporations in on the game, take the control out of the hands of criminal warlords. I know a lot of people will disagree with me about certain drugs, but if a guy could go down to a specilized market, one regulated, taxed and controlled, and pick up some cocaine for his weekend off then he's not getting that coke from some pusher and not funding criminal enterprise.

You ask this in OT.. where the majority of users either have or are currently using drugs.. You could not have expected anything but a completely one-sided debate here.UCF_Knight

That's a pretty bold accusation there.

[QUOTE="UCF_Knight"]You ask this in OT.. where the majority of users either have or are currently using drugs.. You could not have expected anything but a completely one-sided debate here.InEMplease

HA! SO true!

Unless many people that don't use drugs support legaliztion as well. Oh look, this is the case.

This better?InEMplease

Nope.

Unless many people that don't use drugs support legaliztion as well.

Oh look, this is the case.

InEMplease

I was referring to this part, actually.

I don't care, nor care to argue, how many people you think here actually use drugs.

They should be legal. Things like meth and heroin are a bit iffy because that stuff can **** you up. But stuff like Weed, LSD and Ectasy should be legal

You assume most people here in support of illegal narcotics have done illegal narcotics. I pointed out the error in your assumption, and you still have not realized it. There's no argument here mate, you have your foot in your mouth.InEMplease

[QUOTE="InEMplease"]You assume most people here in support of illegal narcotics have done illegal narcotics. I pointed out the error in your assumption, and you still have not realized it. There's no argument here mate, you have your foot in your mouth.UCF_Knight

You made the claim that most OT users ether use or have used drugs. It's up to you to prove it, not up to anyone else to disprove it.

[QUOTE="InEMplease"]You assume most people here in support of illegal narcotics have done illegal narcotics. I pointed out the error in your assumption, and you still have not realized it. There's no argument here mate, you have your foot in your mouth.UCF_Knight

As for the topic, what people put into their own bodies should be their decision. The issue is just regulating what they can and can't do when doing these drugs, like with alcohol and driving. By making drugs illegal it costs ridiculous amounts of money to try to stop it from being sold and the drug war has done nothing to stop anything, drug users fill up US prisons, and by not being legal and not allowed to be distributed within the United States it all comes from areas like Mexico and causes a lot of violence.

You made the claim that most OT users ether use or have used drugs. It's up to you to prove it, not up to anyone else to disprove it.worlock77

[QUOTE="worlock77"]You made the claim that most OT users ether use or have used drugs. It's up to you to prove it, not up to anyone else to disprove it.UCF_Knight

You must by paying close attention. Past debates on this subject have been anything but one-sided.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]You made the claim that most OT users ether use or have used drugs. It's up to you to prove it, not up to anyone else to disprove it.UCF_Knight

Does taking drugs make your opinion any less valid?toast_burner

You must by paying close attention. Past debates on this subject have been anything but one-sided.worlock77

When it comes to the legalization of marijuana, many people will be in support because many people would have experimented with it. However, the hot topic is the legalization of ALL narcotics, which is a bit more controversial, and you really can't make rash generalizations.InEMplease

I did not comment on the validity of people's opinions, only the polarity. [QUOTE="worlock77"]You must by paying close attention. Past debates on this subject have been anything but one-sided.UCF_Knight

I would say that my experience with drugs means that I'm educated about it, I've taken drugs and I'm fine, I've also seen people wreak their life's with drugs. How can you judge something without trying it first?

Those of you saying hardcore drugs should be illegal, how do you determine which drugs are 'hardcore' and therefore illegal?

Death rates, addiction rates, capacity for overdose?

XenonRadon

How can you judge something without trying it first?

toast_burner

I think we're moving further and further away from what I originally said.

People can use drugs, and their opinions are still valid. I did not say the opinions expressed here were not valid because they were bias.

I said the debate at hand would be rather one sided because the majority of people here have had experience with marijuana, at the least. And I don't believe many people that have used marijuana are very strong advocates of keeping it illegal.

My whole point is that there are better places to ask this question and watch an actual debate unfold. I didn't realize I would upset everyone by claiming at least half the people here have experience with marijuana.

Especially when I've seen very few people in threads like these claim to have never used an illegal substance..

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

How can you judge something without trying it first?

UCF_Knight

I think we're moving further and further away from what I originally said.

People can use drugs, and their opinions are still valid. I did not say the opinions expressed here were not valid because they were bias.

I said the debate at hand would be rather one sided because the majority of people here have had experience with marijuana, at the least. And I don't believe many people that have used marijuana are very strong advocates of keeping it illegal.

My whole point is that there are better places to ask this question and watch an actual debate unfold. I didn't realize I would upset everyone by claiming at least half the people here have experience with marijuana.

Especially when I've seen very few people in threads like these claim to have never used an illegal substance..

If you've never tried any drug then your opinion isn't very educated and just as likely to be one sided. First hand experience is always more important then what you read in books.toast_burner

Especially when I've seen very few people in threads like these claim to have never used an illegal substance..

toast_burner

You've seen another one: I've never used an illegal substance, other than underage drinking.

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

Especially when I've seen very few people in threads like these claim to have never used an illegal substance..

Palantas

You've seen another one: I've never used an illegal substance, other than underage drinking.

"Hard drugs" yes

other drugs....depends.

This is the correct answer.