This post fits with the 20 Issues – 40 Weeks Series, but, since it was not on my list of 19 + 1 that I originally posted, I have decided to slip it in here.
The title was, of course, intended to get your attention. But, surprisingly, it is not the least bit deceptive. I could and would support a candidate who campaigned for a policy of drug legalization. Rather than explain why it makes sense, I will ask a few questions that I hope will create a bit of discussion.
1. Are elicit drugs and their non-medical use generating a large portion of the criminal activity in the USA?
2. Is there a large population in the United States who have chosen to disregard the laws and who use drugs in ways which are outside the law?
3. If our governments were to legalize drug use and tax it, would our expenses to control the elicit trade go down and our revenue to enforce the laws go up?
4. Are there parallels between our current drug laws (bans against possession and use) and “Prohibition”?
5. Did Prohibition work better or worse than our current laws at stopping the activity it banned?
If your answers to these questions are the same as mine, you may agree with me. It would seem that legalizing drug use, but controlling it through laws and taxation similar to the way we handle alcohol would:
1. Lower crime;
2. Increase government revenue to fight crime;
3. Decrease pressure on our borders;
4. Not dramatically change the amount of use of elicit drugs.
In short, is it possible that our current drug policies have limited supplies and driven up prices to the point where more people have incentives to produce and distribute drugs (outside the law) than would be the case if drugs were legal and taxed?
Would you vote for a candidate who supported a drug legalization plan?
What do you think?
Responsibility-Freedom Demands It 
13 comments
Comments feed for this article
May 21, 2010 at 10:08 pm
Shirley Caldwell
Ummm…Mr. Toes, Your questions are very legitimate, and in most cases your points are well taken. However, have you looked at the other side of that coin? What would be the negatives? I’d like to pose some questions for you:
1. Would legalization increase or decrease the flow of drugs to our country?
May 21, 2010 at 10:27 pm
Shirley Caldwell
Sorry, Mr. Toes, I accidentially cut off.
2. What would be the legal age to buy…eighteen or twenty-one?
3. Would this cut down on the illegal sale to minors?
4. Would we need more or less people in law enforcement to control distribution of drugs?
5. How would this affect the black market dealers?
6. What affect would this have on family values, crime in schools, streets, etc.
How much money, if any would be saved or spent in rehabilitation; especially of our youth?
7. How would we control the sale to minors?
8. What health issues would we face immediate or long term?
9. What kind of socialogical and psychological effects would this have on this generation and others to come?
10. How would we control the spread of lawlessness and decay in our society.
11. How would we maintain our freedom, dignity, governing power and position of authority with other world leaders?
Mr. toes, maybe I’m not seeing the big picture. Fill me in.
May 21, 2010 at 10:42 pm
The Skald
@Shirley – Legalizing and regulating drug use would create a market based incentive to provide it most inexpensively, and that would mitigate against the expensive smuggling operations.
May 21, 2010 at 11:04 pm
ttoes
Good questions, Shirley, and ones I would want to hear the candidate address. I have copied them below and have put brief parenthetical answers from my understanding/point of view). I am not claiming to have the answers but I find it one of the things that cripples our political debate that certain things are off the table. Things like Social Security Reform, Drug legalization, and withholding tax are not considered and should be.
1. Would legalization increase or decrease the flow of drugs to our country? THIS IS ONE ABOUT WHICH THERE WILL BE MUCH DEBATE, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BRING THE ACTIVITY OUT IN THE OPEN AND MAKE IT LESS ATTRACTIVE TO MANY WHO START DRUGS PARTIALLY AS REBELLION.
2. What would be the legal age to buy…eighteen or twenty-one? ANOTHER GOOD QUESTION. I DON’T LIKE THE FACT THAT WE USE A CHRONOLOGICAL AGE RATHER THAN A EMOTIONAL/PSYCHOLOGICAL TEST, BUT THAT IS A DIFFERENT SUBJECT. IT IS A STATE’S RIGHTS ISSUE AND ONE THEY CAN DECIDE.
3. Would this cut down on the illegal sale to minors? WE CAN LOOK AT CIGARETTES AND ALCOHOL AND I ASSUME WOULD SEE SIMILAR SALES TO MINORS.
4. Would we need more or less people in law enforcement to control distribution of drugs? MOST STUDIES I HAVE SEEN OF PROHIBITION SHOWED THE COST OF ENFORCEMENT WENT UP DURING PROHIBITION. MY GUESS IS THAT WE WOULD SAVE MONEY ON LAW ENFORCEMENT AND SEE A DROP IN CRIME RELATED TO DRUGS.
5. How would this affect the black market dealers? IT SHOULD HAVE THE EFFECT OF KILLING THE BLACK MARKET. DO WE HAVE MANY ILEGAL ALCOHOL DEALERS NOW THAT PROHIBITION IS BEHIND US?
6. What affect would this have on family values, crime in schools, streets, etc.
How much money, if any would be saved or spent in rehabilitation; especially of our youth? I THINK WE CAN AGAIN LOOK AT ALCOHOL TO SEE WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN.
7. How would we control the sale to minors? PROBABLY NOT WELL, BUT MUCH AS WE DO WITH ALCOHOL.
8. What health issues would we face immediate or long term? DON’T KNOW BUT AGAIN GUESS IT WOULD BE EQUAL OR LESS THAN WE NOW FACE.
9. What kind of socialogical and psychological effects would this have on this generation and others to come? I DON’T KNOW BUT THINK WE CAN LOOK AT EXAMPLES OF NATIONS THAT HAVE DONE THIS (HOLLAND) AND LEARN FROM THEIR EXAMPLE.
10. How would we control the spread of lawlessness and decay in our society. I THINK IT WOULD BE LIKE AFTER PROHIBITION – LAWLESSNESS WOULD GO DOWN.
11. How would we maintain our freedom, dignity, governing power and position of authority with other world leaders? I THINK THERE WOULD BE NO EFFECT.
Mr. toes, maybe I’m not seeing the big picture. Fill me in.
Thanks again, Shirley for the questions. what are your answers to these same questions?
Tom
May 22, 2010 at 1:09 pm
Shirley Caldwell
Tom, I don’t really have any concrete answers, but I do have a few ideas. I stand on the legacy and foundation on which this great nation was built. I reflect ,in retrospect, to the days when American was just a small, struggling, proud, nation of people; people who took little thought to sacrificing their lives for what we enjoy today…the great heros of the past, too many for history to even record; unsung but great. What was it all for? The America I remember overcame some amazing battles. What would our predecessors think of us today if we simply gave in to the challenging obstacles our country is facing today? Would they hide their face in shame to know that we just rolled over and gave in? We are looked upon as LEADERS OF THE FREE WORLD NOT LOSSERS, established upon the foundation that was laid by people like you and me. People who were willing to suffer and die for what they believe to be right. Can we just casually toss aside our great heritage? We have a responsibility to preserve and maintain the statues, values and principles of our country. And with that responsibility comes commitment. Yes, our challenges are great, but we can’t solve them with the: “if you can’t beat ’em, join’em attitude. How would you like history to record our generation? If we go down, will it be with honor or dishonor? What legacy will we leave for our children and future generations? It’s more than just a notion, Mr. Toes…something to ponder.
May 22, 2010 at 6:15 am
Felonious Monk
I’ve also put a lot of thought into this subject. After really thinking about it my final outcome surprised even me. You can read my thoughts on the subject at http://monkspoint.wordpress.com/2010/01/13/legalizing-marijuana/
Great post keep up the good work!
Felonious Monk
May 24, 2010 at 10:17 am
JSV
Good questions, good discussion. I agree with TToes, this is something that needs to be debated openly and honestly. On that note, I’ll bring up a few views and opinions, most of which I share, that are even more beyond the pale in this debate:
– Let’s face facts: drugs are compounds we intentionally ingest that influence neurochemicals. WE ALL TAKE THEM. Sugar, caffeine, nicotine, alchohol, marijuana, cocaine, LSD, methamphetamine, etc. We don’t all take all of them, but we do ALL take sugar (refined sugars, simple carbohydrates in white flower, etc.), and we do so not because of any health benefits or spiritual search but because it influences our neurochemicals in a way we like and because it is part of social norms. Is that any different than pot, cigarettes, alchohol, etc.? Almost all of us do the same with caffeine, most with alchohol, and still very many with nicotine.
– Let’s stop pretending that the drugs that “normal” people take are different or better than drugs that “abberant” people take. Here’s my list of a few drugs from “best to worst” on the basis of social and health effects: 1. Hallucinogens (LSD/mescaline/psilocybin/DMT, etc.) 2. Marijuana 3. Caffeine 4. Sugar 5. Alchohol 6. Nicotine 7. Amphetamines 8. Opioids 9. That isn’t a list of “when used responsibly,” but a list of “as used.” When used responsibly, I think that amphetamines and opiods could move in front of alchohol, cafeine, and sugar used responsibly. Other than on the basis of presumed “morality” (more on this below), does anyone dispute this ranking? This ranking isn’t gospel, but I’d suggest that people who think LSD is more potentially dangerous than sugar, or that marijuana is more dangerous than alchohol (both “as used” and “when used responsibly”) don’t understand the science surrounding this issue…
– Why are some empirically less harmful drugs (e.g. LSD) considered “immoral” by so many, despite the open acceptance of empirically more harmful drugs (e.g. alchohol, nicotine, sugar, caffeine) by the same people? I think there are two things at play here. 1) Some drugs, especially those that are hallucinogens (LSD/mescaline/ketamine/DMT, psilocybin) or that have hallucinogenic potential (e.g. marijuana) are not compatible with top-down ideological/social/economic control of society. 2) Many people point to the greater potential for centralization and industrialization of alchohol/nicotine/sugar compared to the ease of individual production/use of marijuana as a key reason why there is such a powerful lobby keeping the former legal and the latter illegal.
– Frankly, I think the first society that openly accepts the responsible use of all drugs will see a huge competitive advantage. While I think there are excellent revenue, freedom, and crime control reasons for wide-spread legalization of drugs, I’m talking here about the potential for innovation. Did you know that the following discoveries were made by people while using LSD: Francis Crick’s discovery of DNA’s double helix shape; Kary Mullis won the Nobel prize for his discovery of how to replicate the polymerase chain reaction process, something he conceived of while using LSD; Douglas Englebart (inventor of the computer mouse); Steve Jobs said it was “one of the two or three most important things” he has done in his life; etc. It’s simply not acceptable to talk about these things in polite political debate, but given the number of grave problems we face today–problems where one possible solution is innovation–I firmly believe that we need open research into the potential of hallucinogens.
Just some food for thought…
May 24, 2010 at 4:30 pm
ttoes
Thanks for the thoughtful comment, JSV. Your thought about debating the issue “openly and honestly” may be the most important thing you said. There are so many issues that are off limits for political debate that we get very little honest discussion about many, if not most, important issues.
I have just written a brief post on voter/election fraud. Everyone should be up in arms about what is going on in our election process but instead, we dishonestly turn every event into a chance to push our own political agenda. If you do a quick search for “voter fraud” you will find very polarized comments from both sides, almost always focussed on blaming the other rather than addressing the issue.
Drugs, of course, are off limits because our parents said they were. If that is the best argument our politicians have against legalizing drugs, we ought to legalize them on the principle alone.
In theory, people who use (abuse) drugs cost our society in loss of life and health and therefore must be banned. It might be interesting to compare drug (and alcohol) use and driving automobiles to see which causes more injury, death and cost to our society. Do I hear anyone recommending we make driving a car illegal?
Tom
June 9, 2010 at 3:59 pm
20 – 40 (issue #20) Your Favorite Issue Goes Here « Responsibility-Freedom Demands It
[…] Extra Issue – Legalize Drugs. […]
July 15, 2010 at 12:11 pm
20 – 40 (Issue #8) – The Environment « Responsibility-Freedom Demands It
[…] Health care was #1, Jobs was #2, Taxes was Issue #3, Agriculture was #4, Government Spending/National Debt was #5, Commerce was #6, Energy was #7. We also did #20 – Your Issue goes here. On that one we got one response that I want to pursue – Innovation, a subject near and dear to my heart and one that I think will be very significant for our future as a nation. We also threw in an extra issue – Legalize Drugs. […]
October 6, 2010 at 4:24 pm
“20 Issues – 40 Weeks” Less than 4 weeks to go…HELP!!!! « Responsibility-Freedom Demands It
[…] Extra Issue – Legalize Drugs. […]
October 26, 2010 at 12:05 pm
20 – 40 Unfinished Business « Responsibility-Freedom Demands It
[…] Extra Issue – Legalize Drugs. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License […]
January 11, 2011 at 4:23 pm
Ten Things We Need To Fix « Responsibility-Freedom Demands It
[…] Illegal Drug Use/Abuse ( see post at https://ttoes.wordpress.com/2010/05/19/20-40-extra-issue-legalize-drugs/ ) […]