promotion image of download ymail app
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 1 decade ago

Regarding the legalization of drugs: How far should we go on the state level?

I believe that the federal ban on drugs is that makes it a state and local issue.

Would you support the legalization of say...marijuana?

the issue of marijuana isn't that big of a deal to me...I don't think it would be too bad if it was legalized.

How about Harder drugs like Crystal Meth?

I know it's easy to say that it's a "victimless crime" but for drugs like crystal meth....Many robberies are drug related because some addict is in a frenzy to get money for it.


There is definitely a case FOR legalizing weed, but there is also one for keeping it illegal on a state level. The gateway affect is a totally reasonable argument...

Anyways...persuade me.

12 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    The drug generally isn't more harmful than alcohol or tobacco if used in moderation. As you'll see by reading research studies from the related links section at the bottom of the page, the studies of the harmfulness of marijuana are inconclusive and contradictory. Most doctors would agree that it's not very harmful if used in moderation. It's only when you abuse the drug that problems start to occur. But isn't abuse of almost any bad substance a problem? If you abuse alcohol, caffeine, Ephedra, cigarettes, or even pizza, health problems are sure to follow. Would you want the government limiting how much coffee you can drink or how much cheesecake you take in? Most doctors believe that marijuana is no more addictive that alcohol or tobacco.

    Limiting the use of the drug intrudes on personal freedom. Even if the drug is shown to be harmful, isn't it the right of every person to choose what harms him or her? Marijuana use is generally thought of as a "victimless crime", in that only the user is being harmed. You can't legislate morality when people disagree about what's considered "moral".

    Legalization would mean a lower price; thus, related crimes (like theft) would be reduced. All illegal drugs are higher in price because the production, transportation, and sale of the drugs carry heavy risks. When people develop drug habits or addictions, they must somehow come up with the money to support their cravings. Unless a person is wealthy, he or she must often resort to robbery and other crimes to generate the money needed to buy the drugs. Legalization would reduce the risks and thus reduce the prices. There would therefore be less need for the secondary crimes needed to raise money.

    There are medical benefits such as the those for cancer patients. As detailed in the related links section, there are a number of medical benefits of marijuana, most notably in the treatment of patients undergoing chemotherapy. Others believe it helps in the treatment of depression. Certain states like California have brought initiatives to legalize the drug for at least medicinal purposes.

    Street justice related to drug disputes would be reduced. Currently, if someone in the drug trade screws you over, there's no police to call or lawyers to litigate. You must settle disputes yourself. This often leads to cycles of retaliatory violence. Legalization would create proper means to settle disputes.

    It could be a source of additional tax revenues. An enormous amount of money is raised through government taxation of alcohol, cigarettes, and other "sins". The legalization of marijuana would create another item that could be taxed. I'm sure the government would have no problem spending all that extra money.

    Police and court resources would be freed up for more serious crimes. Many consider the War on Drugs an expensive failure. Resources for DEA, FBI, and border security are only the tip of the iceberg. You must add in the cost of police officers, judges, public defenders, prosecutors, juries, court reporters, prison guards, and so on. Legalization of marijuana would free up those people to concentrate on more important things like terrorism, harder drugs, rape, murder, and so on. In addition, an already overloaded civil court docket would be improved; thus, the wait time for other legitimate court cases would be reduced.

    Drug dealers (including some terrorists) would lose most or all of their business. Perhaps the biggest opponents of legalizing drugs are the drug dealers themselves. They make their enormous sums of money because of the absence of competition and the monstrous street prices that come from the increased risk. Legalization would lower prices and open competition; thus, drug cartels (that might include terrorists) would lose all or some of their business.

    The FDA or others could regulate the quality and safety of drugs. Many drug users become sick or die because of poorly-prepared products. After all, there is nothing to regulate what is sold and no way to sue anyone for product liability. By bringing marijuana into the legitimate business world, you can oversee production and regulate sales.

    Like sex, alcohol, or cigarettes, marijuana is one of life's little pleasures for some people. All of us have our guilty pleasures. They are part of what makes life worth living. Several of these little pleasures--coffee, sex, alcohol, cigarettes, etc.--are potentially harmful if abused. Even legal substances like pizza and donuts can be harmful to a person if not consumed in moderation. Would you want to give up all these things for the rest of your life? Would you want someone else telling you what you can and can't have when it is only your body that is affected?

    Drug busts often trap young people in a flawed system that turns them into lifelong criminals. Imagine an impressionable teenager who is tired of earning minimum wage, who hates living in a poor ghetto area, or who needs to sa

    Source(s): States and/or counties could still choose to keep it illegal, then constituents can vote with their feet.
    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    The gateway drug theory is crap based on biased studies.

    The slippery slope is an argument I completely disagree with in any context. Its an excuse, used to scare people out of doing whatever is at stake. Oh no, if we legalize same sex marriage people will want to marry their animals. oh no, if we make marijuana legal, people will want to do cocaine. Although< ironically in the case of medical marijuana, all the other drugs are already legal. Cocaine, meth, heroine are all used medicinally, and they as well as derivatives are given medically every day.

    But what really gets me, is that slope has two directions. If we are going to keep marijuana criminalized because it may lead to other drugs, then alcohol, tobacco, and every single product on the market that can produce a recreational high should be made illegal.

    Persuade you that the gateway drug theory is bs? Go read the studies yourself. They gather hard core drug addicts in treatment facilities, and ask them what their first illegal drug was. They dont take into consideration whether or not it was really their first recreational drug, if they had used other drugs before hand legally or by rx that produce a high even when used as directed. They dont take into consideration family history of drug abuse, as well as several other factors that could impact whether or not the person will move on to harder drugs.

    They also dont take into consideration the people that used or currently use marijuana that have no legal problems, are educated, have successful careers and never went on to do or become addicted to harder drugs.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    it IS unconstitutional, each state has the right to decide how they want to address the drug issue

    I don't smoke pot but I do support its legalization, its not like anyone doesn't smoke pot because its illegal so the only thing that would change if it was legalized would be that it could be taxed and it could be regulated

    meth is far more dangerous but millions of kids with ADD are on the Rx version, Adderall

    if all drugs were legal the price would drop drastically, alcohol causes more harm to people than all other drugs combined...not that I am saying I would support legalizing meth

    Source(s): I think we should state with legalizing pot in some areas, I live in So Cal and my state is in major financial trouble that could be fixed or at least reduced with tax revenue from weed and it would be a good experiment for the rest of the country
    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    It is a states issue, but banning certain drugs isn't unconstitutional, I wouldn't think. I believe certain drugs should be legalized (pot, acid, heroin...nah, just pot), and that many prescription drugs should be sold OTC. It is ridiculous to have to go to the doctor to get a mild pain-killer; if people choose to abuse them, then so be it. Crystal Meth has no medicinal purpose whatsoever and it rots the soul of people that abuse it. However, marijuana is much safer than alcohol and should absolutely be legalized and taxed. Mary Jane only makes people stupid, and maybe a little liberal, but it never did me. Also it makes music so much better!

    Let me say this too: I am not a liberal, but a very independent libertarian/conservative.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Danny
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    I am for legalizing all drugs. Just because some people get addicted and cannot control themselves, is no reason to ban drugs. If that were the logic we followed, everything from gambling to sex would be illegal. Me sitting in my living room shooting up a bag of dope hurts no one, just as me gambling away my entire weekly paycheck hurts no one. Just because the guy down the street might get addicted to dope and start robbing houses is no reason to punish me.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Legalize all drugs.

    We're experiencing the EXACT same scenario as 1930's prohibition.

    - victimless act made "illegal"

    - street gangs selling an unsafe product to supply the demand to make money

    - consumers are exposed to unsafe product due to black market consequences

    - violence increases over territory

    It's all ridiculous. It's all victimless. Ingesting a drug? No victim. Robbery? Obvious victim.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I think it should start with the legalization of Marijuana. I don't feel its any worse than Alcohol or tobacco. I think banning it creates more crime than it prevents. Prohibition didn't work in the past and it doesn't work now.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I say legalize ALL OF IT.

    The only reason people rob for drug money is because they are illegal. Which raises the price. If drugs were legal the price would drop.

    No one is robbing people for beer money for example. The intrinsic value of crack or weed or heroin is low. It's expensive because of the risks associated with smuggling it into the country.

    The truth is anyone who wants to smoke weed, or crack, or snort coke, does already. We're just kidding ourselves with these laws.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Otto's Answer is perfect.

    Why are we still argueing about weed legalization? All the progressive countries are doing it, eventually we'll be there, too.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I support the legalization of any drug that doesn't kill a person. Meth does kill, Marijuana does not. Salvia, currently legal but is being attacked, also doesn't kill.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.