Should we legalize (ill.) drugs and use the tax revenue to fund drug education?

[RR1997]

Donald Trump (relatively) recently stated that he supports this idea. Do you support this idea?

Discuss.

[RR1997]

I personally believe that this idea is hilarious.

[Maxwell]

To a certain extent, yes, I actually think this is a good idea. In Trump's little journey through politics, he has accidentally bumped into a couple of not bad ideas, I will begrudgingly admit.

[PJ]

I personally believe that this idea is hilarious.

An attempt to change the horrid, racist, policy known as the "War on Drugs" is hilarious?

Any alternative would be preferable to the current federal scenario, so I'm willing to support the proposal on that basis alone. All recreational drugs should be legalized, and funding should be directed towards rehabilitation programs available and free of charge for those who need it. We also should be funding comprehensive drug education, as opposed to the nonsense currently peddled by DARE. The biggest problem with the proposal is that it funds otherwise good programs regressively. Sin taxes are terribly regressive, take advantage of those with addictions, and are a poor excuse for not taxing the rich that ought to be abolished.

[RR1997]

I personally believe that this idea is hilarious.

An attempt to change the horrid, racist, policy known as the "War on Drugs" is hilarious?

Any alternative would be preferable to the current federal scenario, so I'm willing to support the proposal on that basis alone. All recreational drugs should be legalized, and funding should be directed towards rehabilitation programs available and free of charge for those who need it. We also should be funding comprehensive drug education, as opposed to the nonsense currently peddled by DARE. The biggest problem with the proposal is that it funds otherwise good programs regressively. Sin taxes are terribly regressive, take advantage of those with addictions, and are a poor excuse for not taxing the rich that ought to be abolished.

No.

I'm all for drug legalization and ending the "War on Drugs". It's just kind of funny how Trump wants to legalize drugs to fund programs that teach kids to stay from those drugs. It's also funny because Donald Trump (of all people) supports this.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

For pot, sure. But otherwise no. Heroin/Cocaine/LSD etc. are legitimately dangerous and should never be lefal.

[TNF]

No. We should legalize all drugs but not tax any of them.

[politicus]

No. We should legalize all drugs but not tax any of them.

Legalizing the most additive drugs, like heroin, is crazy.

[TNF]

No. We should legalize all drugs but not tax any of them.

Legalizing the most additive drugs, like heroin, is crazy.

Allowing them to remain illegal is worse. I'd rather not fill the prisons up with people on account of what amounts to a victimless crime. Legalization would offer safer avenues for the use of the drug and would take away the criminal element that goes along with it, crushing the black market in the process and making the use of the drug safer for its users. So long as the sale is tightly regulated, I see no reason why any drug should be prohibited. Prohibition is a waste of time, effort, and resources.

[ElectionsGuy]

We already have drug education. I agree with legalizing and taxing drugs (although ideally we should just legalize them), but using it to fund drug education I feel is a waste of money. Most drug users aren't going to care what they were told during high school about pot or heroin, just putting more money into it won't convince many other people not to use drugs.

[DC Al Fine]

No. People like this sort of thing because it's "logical" to tie the taxes and expenditure like this, but the tax revenue raised rarely matches up well to the need for the program.

And besides hard drugs is hardly a victimless crime. Anyone dealing things like heroine is ruining lives and wrecking families, and the addicts often have to resort to petty theft and the like to fund their habit. 

[TNF]

Well, I don't know about others here who favor legalization, but I certainly don't favor legalizing hard drugs and allowing those sales to be conducted by individual drug dealers. People who deal in the hard stuff are scum who deserve to be strung up, obviously. Ideally they would be marketed by a state monopoly, but assuming they end up getting legalized before capitalism is overthrown, I guess I could stomach them being sold by Big Pharma until they get expropriated. Better to give it the veneer of legality rather than continue to allow the illegality of it all to result in mass incarceration, overdose death, and the stigma that comes with use.

[dead0man]

For pot, sure. But otherwise no. Heroin/Cocaine/LSD etc. are legitimately dangerous and should never be lefal.

Cocaine and LSD are not as dangerous as you've been lead to believe.  Much more dangerous than weed, sure.  Probably less dangerous than alcohol though.


But yes, most recreational drugs should be legal (weed, coke, acid, x(mdma), a few others I'm sure) or decriminalized (everything else)....especially for the user.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

For pot, sure. But otherwise no. Heroin/Cocaine/LSD etc. are legitimately dangerous and should never be lefal.

Cocaine and LSD are not as dangerous as you've been lead to believe.  Much more dangerous than weed, sure.  Probably less dangerous than alcohol though.


But yes, most recreational drugs should be legal (weed, coke, acid, x(mdma), a few others I'm sure) or decriminalized (everything else)....especially for the user.

If by decriminalization you mean replacing prison time with mandated treatment, I can support that for non-violent offenders as long as there is a clear 'red line' after which (part of) the present prison sentence is applied. But legalization is something you have to be very careful with, as it could result in a massive increase in the # of people who use a certain drug because you no longer have to use a black market to get to it.

[DavidB.]

Legalizing the most additive drugs, like heroin, is crazy.

Allowing them to remain illegal is worse. I'd rather not fill the prisons up with people on account of what amounts to a victimless crime. Legalization would offer safer avenues for the use of the drug and would take away the criminal element that goes along with it, crushing the black market in the process and making the use of the drug safer for its users. So long as the sale is tightly regulated, I see no reason why any drug should be prohibited. Prohibition is a waste of time, effort, and resources.

Yes, I tend to agree with this, and with Trump's idea. The War on Drugs is immoral, ineffective, and extremely costly.

[sparkey]

I'm supportive of drug legalization/decriminalization in general, but I'm skeptical that "education" is the best use of the funds raised through drug taxes. DARE, for example, has had trouble demonstrating its efficacy. What sort of "education" would be proposed?

[dead0man]

If by decriminalization you mean replacing prison time with mandated treatment, I can support that for non-violent offenders as long as there is a clear 'red line' after which (part of) the present prison sentence is applied.

No, I don't think people that can't stop doing heroin should be put in prison, unless they're doing violent sh**t or robbing people, but then only for those things, their addictions shouldn't play a role in the length of their stay.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't know about massive increase, maybe for the "lighter" drugs like mdma and weed (and even then, not massive increases...if you want to get high now, it's not hard at all to find it....despite putting millions in prison, the war on drugs has done NOTHING to stop the accessibility of drugs), but you're not going to have regular folk going out and becoming coke heads because they can suddenly go downtown and buy some at the store.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

If by decriminalization you mean replacing prison time with mandated treatment, I can support that for non-violent offenders as long as there is a clear 'red line' after which (part of) the present prison sentence is applied.

No, I don't think people that can't stop doing heroin should be put in prison, unless they're doing violent sh**t or robbing people, but then only for those things, their addictions shouldn't play a role in the length of their stay.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't know about massive increase, maybe for the "lighter" drugs like mdma and weed (and even then, not massive increases...if you want to get high now, it's not hard at all to find it....despite putting millions in prison, the war on drugs has done NOTHING to stop the accessibility of drugs), but you're not going to have regular folk going out and becoming coke heads because they can suddenly go downtown and buy some at the store.

There's some people though who want to get high but don't because:

A) fear of drug dealers
B) fear of prison and/or
C) lack of information about accessing the black market

We don't know how big of a group that is, and 100% of them would start getting high the moment they can just walk down to their local pharmacy and grab some. Also, existing users might start using more than usual due to easier accessibility.

These are legitimately dangerous drugs, and to legalize them is only to encourage their use. And if that means throwing those who don't respond to treatment in a reasonable amount of time into prison, the government must continue to do that.

[Cory]

For pot, sure. But otherwise no. Heroin/Cocaine/LSD etc. are legitimately dangerous and should never be legal.

Yeah, no.  Cocaine and LSD aren't anywhere near a strong a presented in the mainstream media. DXM in cough medicine is much stronger than LSD for instance and Cocaine doesn't get you anywhere near a ed up as alcohol. All because someone had a certain effect in Hollywood movies doesn't mean it's real. I mean c'mon these are the same people who have a "stoner" character having vivid hallucinations, which everyone knows is just silly.

To compare either of those to heroin is just silly.

[pho]

I would rather just legalize drugs and use the tax revenue to reduce the deficit. Lack of education isn't the root cause of drug addiction, people know that drugs are harmful—why waste the money reminding them?

[Dirk]

No. People who sincerely believe drug normalization and legalization would sap drug cartels and erase the phenomenon overnight don't have their fingers on the pulse of reality. There is no fundamental distinction to be made whether one purchases drugs from a seasoned criminal or a licensed vendor; the social costs remain very much the same. I am convinced, if drugs are made legal, we will be reminded of why they were made illegal. A drug dealer in a suit and tie is a drug dealer nonetheless.

[Thunderbird is the word]

I support legalizing drugs but I think that tying them to tax revenue is stupid. I've always been annoyed by the "tax the sh**t out of it" crowd, raising sales taxes to exorbitant levels is regressive and just leads to avoidance. I'm opposed to sin taxes in general.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

No. People who sincerely believe alcohol normalization and legalization would sap rumrunners and erase the phenomenon overnight don't have their fingers on the pulse of reality. There is no fundamental distinction to be made whether one purchases booze from a seasoned criminal or a licensed vendor; the social costs remain very much the same. I am convinced, if intoxicating liquors are made legal, we will be reminded of why they were made illegal. A bootlegger in a suit and tie is a bootlegger nonetheless.

I didn't write the above parody because I think drug legalization is a panacea. Indeed, legalization alone may well be worse than the current situation. However, redirecting the money and effort currently spent on using law enforcement to curb drug use would be much better spent on treatment.

[Dirk]

No. People who sincerely believe alcohol normalization and legalization would sap rumrunners and erase the phenomenon overnight don't have their fingers on the pulse of reality. There is no fundamental distinction to be made whether one purchases booze from a seasoned criminal or a licensed vendor; the social costs remain very much the same. I am convinced, if intoxicating liquors are made legal, we will be reminded of why they were made illegal. A bootlegger in a suit and tie is a bootlegger nonetheless.

I didn't write the above parody because I think drug legalization is a panacea. Indeed, legalization alone may well be worse than the current situation. However, redirecting the money and effort currently spent on using law enforcement to curb drug use would be much better spent on treatment.

The long-term consequences of prolonged alcohol abuse can and, in many cases, do eclipse those of marijuana. However, I believe it is important to recognize not everyone who drinks alcohol does so to get drunk. The same observation can't be made about marijuana and, in that manner, it is linked with more lethal drugs not unlike heroin more so than it is alcohol and tobacco even if it results in fewer deaths (which would change if it were commercially available).

[dead0man]

No. People who sincerely believe alcohol normalization and legalization would sap rumrunners and erase the phenomenon overnight don't have their fingers on the pulse of reality. There is no fundamental distinction to be made whether one purchases booze from a seasoned criminal or a licensed vendor; the social costs remain very much the same. I am convinced, if intoxicating liquors are made legal, we will be reminded of why they were made illegal. A bootlegger in a suit and tie is a bootlegger nonetheless.

I didn't write the above parody because I think drug legalization is a panacea. Indeed, legalization alone may well be worse than the current situation. However, redirecting the money and effort currently spent on using law enforcement to curb drug use would be much better spent on treatment.

The long-term consequences of prolonged alcohol abuse can and, in many cases, do eclipse those of marijuana. However, I believe it is important to recognize not everyone who drinks alcohol does so to get drunk. The same observation can't be made about marijuana and, in that manner, it is linked with more lethal drugs not unlike heroin more so than it is alcohol and tobacco even if it results in fewer deaths (which would change if it were commercially available).

Dude, you are totally talking out of your ass.  Not everyone that smokes weed does so to get stoned.  And no, it can't be "linked" (whatever that means) to heroin easier than alcohol.  And yes, of course if more people are getting stoned, a few more people will fall off hotel balconies and die from being stoned (about the only way people die from smoking weed), but the lives saved by people that would have got drunk, but got stoned instead will be statistically noticeable.