legalisation

is it acceptable for lower class drugs, such as cannabis, to be legalised? should drug crimes carry such heavy burdens?

i say legalise all drugs

me too, but on a serious note, where can i buy ehter? do i need a license? is it a classed drug?

i totally disagree…i don’t believe in the legalisation of Class A Drugs…a better option would be to strength laws behind the use and supply of these drugs!
example if you know ur going to get beaten for having these drugs on you, then it will be a perfect deterrent!

but before people start attacking me and saying it is ubsurd to even think that, i will say that i don’t believe in violence, and i don’t think violence can resolve many problems. (this applies more so to a certain Guru?! )

I am so undecided on this topic, it’s quite a marvel.

In some ways, I think cannabis should be legalised. It’s legal to smoke cigarettes anyway, so they might as well, and it just means they could regulate what went into it, as well as get some valuable tax off it.

However… it would mean half the people in the world would be wandering around in a permanent state of complete gormlessness. Everyone knows a stoner, and they’re always boring as hell.

I don’t think any other drugs should be legalised. It’s just not necessary. The cannabis issue needs to be sorted because it’s undermining the government - having cigarettes legal, but not cannabis, is a bit daft. Everything else is a bit pointless, if you ask me.

bit of a sweeping statement there

she better get used to sweeping eh?

s’true

I think they should all be legalised. Then, the government should regulate them (a bit)… put incredibly high taxes on them, and spend the money on … err, me would be nice, but more realistically, the NHS or something? yes, it would cause problems, but drugs are a problem at moment, at least with them legalised there would be extra government revenue and less police work to be done.

I think cannabis should be legalised. You always see reports saying “All heroin addicts started off on cannabis, this means we should not legalise cannabis.” BZZT wrong thanks for playing, your logic is skewed. All A’s are B, does not follow that all B’s are A. All heroin addicts may have started on cannabis, but all cannabis users do not become heroin addicts. Many people try cannabis for a bit and then never do it again, some people do cannabis and then only do that for the rest of their lives and some people go onto harder drugs. For the people in the first two scenarios, they could be given a criminal record for something that is as common as parking on double yellow lines.

Legalising cannabis would not stop underground drug pushing but, all of a sudden the next step of rebellion goes to speed or ecstacy, which are much harder drugs. Many people are going to be put off the idea of these drugs. Of course this is in theory, you’d hope that it was true.

If you’re going to ban cannabis then ban cigarrettes aswell. It’s a shame that the British economy relies so much on the sale of cancer sticks.

i’m undecided on this topic at the mo. however, i do strongly object to teenagers thinking that all drugs make you ‘‘cool’’. they don’t. a lot of people are laughing at you.

i don’t think dope is considerd ‘cool’ as such, i think it is in the same vien as smoking, some people do it and like it others don’t. there isn’t any sort of social status attached to it. the only bad thing about it to me is the addictiveness, plus it is so damn relaxing

it has been proven that strengthening the laws behind drugs is not a deterrent, as system of a down sing "increase treatment, and decrease mandatory minimum sentances". anyway what gives the government the right to dictat what you do to you're body. plus if drugs are legalised it is possible to regulate what is in them. alcohol and tobacco are prime examples of these.

[This message has been edited by macca (edited 23 January 2002).]

Drugs Aren’t going to disappear. The druids used them for goodness sake! So I do feel some action is needed. I agree with the legalisation of some soft drugs if it means that what goes in them can be controlled and thus prevents yet another ecstacy death. I am un-decided on the harder drugs (not to say that ecstacy is a soft drug!) I also agree with the posts in this topic as regards smoking, If the goverment lets 16 years olds legally smoke then how can it tell 21 year olds not to smoke dope? In coutries where dope laws are more relaxed there has been a mainly positive result. The problem is MPs that seem to have the “all drugs are the same” attitude. There has to be some diferention.

Olly was right. Drugs have been used by ancient civilisations for millennia without problems. It was only from Victorian times onwards that they have been seen as a menace

You should read anything by Timothy Leary or Robert Anton Wilson for more on the possible uses of “illegal” substances in medicine and psychology

(BTW Leary was jailed as a quack and a communist by the US Govt. Of course they couldnt possibly be wrong. Of course.)

------------------
Join the POEE!
Paratheo-anametamystikhood of Eris Esoteric
A Non-prophet organisation
rawilson.com/main.shtml

not legalization - decriminalization.
One man is immoral in the act of governing another man’s personal use of drugs, foods, medicines -anything (by governing, I mean using physical force which covers anything from taxes to jail cells to guns).
A man’s life is his own and he has the right to do with it as he sees fit.

Brian stated:

You may want to add some qualifiers to that, like a man’s life is his own as long as he does according to himself without infringing on the rights of others. Furthermore, life is not something as selfish as it sounds. Your body is from the earth, you are confined by matter and the laws that apply to it. You CANNOT do as you fit for those reasons. There are other moral implications many do not consider, like the fact that if you were to eat nothing but chocolate you would soon need to be hospitalized, if you live in Canada your hospital bill is paid by tax payers, I would not be happy to learn that my tax dollars went to healing your dumb ass because you don’t know any better than to eat nothing but chocolate. Maybe you can use what I have said above to amend your theory a little, add some qualifiers and come out with a reasonable conclusion by which you may wish to guide your life. As it stands now I don’t condone you doing anything according to your above quote.

What’s your take?

Legalize all of them. Tax it as they do with alcohol and fags according to the type of drug, sell it only to adults (as if)…
If some one wants to be so stupid… that’s their choice… as long as they don’t interfere with other peoples choices, that’s alright. However… smokers do interfere in my choice of breathing a clean air…

Well, we live in a community and there are some pretty stupid people we have to sustain.
You are paying for murderess to eat and live in prisons, as you pay for the army to go to war… as you also do for AIDS research even tho you use condoms every time you have sex…. You also pay for those drunkards who happen to be run over, or fight on the streets… and all those people with respiratory problems because of fags… and unemployed people who prefer to live on the dole than really get a job….

There is no way out of it… you pay for everything, whether you do them or not. There are probably some silly chubbies in the hospital because they eat badly… and you are paying for them too.

At least legalizing, the government tax it and give drugs of decent quality to people, and stop a great deal of drug dealers and crimes involving them. And then we you have someone in your family dead because of drugs you can always as for compensation