Portugal decriminalizes drugs; Crime/Usage falls.

KatNotKathy · Jul 10, 2010

GabrielWithoutWings said:
How do you think this would affect Central and South American drug cartels (specifically Mexican) were something like this passed here?

They would take a massive blow to their profits and have difficulty maintaining a violent presence capable of fighting off law enforcement so easily as they do now. They're in the drug trade because it's so profitable. Cut the profit and you starve the gangs and cartels of their big cash cow.

Magic Man · Jul 10, 2010

kai said:
There is no damage in decriminalising personal use ,how far do you go with acceptance of drugs do we just face it that its a fact of life that those walking dead that steal everything that's not bolted down from our back gardens, shoplift jars of coffee or packs of bacon to sell on the street corner etc for a £5 deal are just a fact of life. getting a "bag" from a criminal or a legal distributor---- whats the difference?

Yes, you accept that some people are going to be addicted to drugs, just like they are now. There's nothing else you can do. We can try to help them whenever, but that's easier to do when their addiction isn't illegal. For instance, I watched an episode of a show called "Intervention", where a girl was addicted to heroin or some similar drug. The intervention actually worked, probably because she'd hit rock bottom. She stayed in treatment until she was clean, and stayed clean even after treatment for a couple months before she was picked up for a couple of warrants from things she had done before she got clean. She went to jail and when she came out, she was right back on drugs.

With a more understanding view of the situation, she might not have gone to jail and might still be clean. Just because people want everyone to have the legal right to do drugs doesn't mean everyone is just going to condone their use and accept addiction and the crime that goes with it. What it means is that we can deal with it better.

dust1n · Jul 10, 2010

kai said:
so the state gets an earner from the misery, and unless the legal distributor can provide his goods cheaper and on credit terms the illegal distributor will not be going out of business at all.

When the state gets in a earner it has additional revenue powered by those who would be in misery either way to actually pay for their own treatment via taxes ahead of time as opposed to the state taking large sums of everyone's to try to suppress and then jail every drug use (even more misery), which is extremely costly, ineffective, and ends up fueling black market dealers.

And of course the legal distributor can provide his goods cheaper, scarcity and risk are the majority of the costs.

love · Jul 10, 2010

I don't know why we kid ourselves. Drugs are available to anyone who wants to use them.
For the casual pot smoker the current laws only make an outlaw out of an otherwise law abiding citizen.
Drugs are more available to children because most illegal dealers have no scruples.
I have been to get togethers with people of my generation and younger when someone would light up a joint and pass it around. Some would partake and others would pass. Some including myself would say I would like to but my place of employment does random drug test.
In other words the people who are going to use will do it whether it is illegal or not. Why should we keep ruining the lives of so many petty users by putting them in prison with the real criminals?
Why should we keep it so profitable for the real criminals? Are we blind to what prohibition of alcohol did to enrich criminal enterprises?
Is this aspect of law also for sale by our politians to the highest bidders?

KatNotKathy · Jul 10, 2010

love said:
Drugs are more available to children because most illegal dealers have no scruples.

No kidding. When I was 16 it was easier for me to get weed than beer. Hell, it was easier to get meth than beer.

kai · Jul 10, 2010

KatNotKathy said:
They would take a massive blow to their profits and have difficulty maintaining a violent presence capable of fighting off law enforcement so easily as they do now. They're in the drug trade because it's so profitable. Cut the profit and you starve the gangs and cartels of their big cash cow.

Tell me how decriminalising personal possession is going to hurt Central and South American drug cartels (specifically Mexican) pockets?

kai · Jul 10, 2010

mball1297 said:
Yes, you accept that some people are going to be addicted to drugs, just like they are now. There's nothing else you can do. We can try to help them whenever, but that's easier to do when their addiction isn't illegal. For instance, I watched an episode of a show called "Intervention", where a girl was addicted to heroin or some similar drug. The intervention actually worked, probably because she'd hit rock bottom. She stayed in treatment until she was clean, and stayed clean even after treatment for a couple months before she was picked up for a couple of warrants from things she had done before she got clean. She went to jail and when she came out, she was right back on drugs.

With a more understanding view of the situation, she might not have gone to jail and might still be clean. Just because people want everyone to have the legal right to do drugs doesn't mean everyone is just going to condone their use and accept addiction and the crime that goes with it. What it means is that we can deal with it better.

i wonder how many people actually go to jail for personal possession ? i have quite a lot of interaction with people on heroin in my town and i can tell you most of them are already on treatment, they get methadone from the doctor and take that because its free . and i don't know one single person in my town that's been jailed for possession of an amount that would be deemed "personal" most have been jailed for theft. decriminalising personal possession is a good thing but its only dressing up of the symptoms of the ilness

kai · Jul 10, 2010

dust1n said:
When the state gets in a earner it has additional revenue powered by those who would be in misery either way to actually pay for their own treatment via taxes ahead of time as opposed to the state taking large sums of everyone's to try to suppress and then jail every drug use (even more misery), which is extremely costly, ineffective, and ends up fueling black market dealers.

And of course the legal distributor can provide his goods cheaper, scarcity and risk are the majority of the costs.

i disagree what makes you think a legal distributor can sell Cheaper
i base my assumption on the UK alcohol and tobacco market to think that smugglers etc can undercut legal sources by half. and its supply and demand that fuels the cost. a bag of heroine in my town is £5 now if you can sell it for £2.50 then ---wahey they will buy two bags instead of one.

and how many heroine addicts do you know that hold down a job? we are already subsidising them on benefits as well as free drugs such as Methadone.

decriminalising personal possession is window dressing, most addicts are in prison for theft, shoplifting etc. the fact that the bag of heroine in my pocket is legal has no bearing whatsoever on the fact that when its gone i am going to need another one and i am going to get one hook or by crook.

kai · Jul 10, 2010

KatNotKathy said:
No kidding. When I was 16 it was easier for me to get weed than beer. Hell, it was easier to get meth than beer.

Thats because legal distributors cant sell beer to 16 year old, i doubt their going to be able to sell you legal druggs either. so there's a niche in the market straight a way.

Mercy Not Sacrifice · Jul 11, 2010

dust1n said:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/greenwald_whitepaper.pdf

Page 7.

If the drug rate is the same (and lower for multiple drug users) then when it is criminalized, then where is the damage in decriminalizing it? Tax money off drugs, no tax burden for additional prison space, tourism, free rehabilitation...

The only loser in the process is the military-industrial complex. Paranoid people would also think that they lost, but they would actually have won a saner, safer society. What people want and what people need are not always the same.

GabrielWithoutWings said:
I'm kind of on the fence and can see both sides of the arguments. I lean towards legalization.

How do you think this would affect Central and South American drug cartels (specifically Mexican) were something like this passed here?

It would do to the drug market what electrolysis did to the aluminum market.

Magic Man · Jul 11, 2010

kai said:
i wonder how many people actually go to jail for personal possession ? i have quite a lot of interaction with people on heroin in my town and i can tell you most of them are already on treatment, they get methadone from the doctor and take that because its free . and i don't know one single person in my town that's been jailed for possession of an amount that would be deemed "personal" most have been jailed for theft. decriminalising personal possession is a good thing but its only dressing up of the symptoms of the ilness

OK, then, keep your head in the sand.

kai · Jul 12, 2010

mball1297 said:
OK, then, keep your head in the sand.

well how many people go to jail for personal possession then ? as well as having a life long friend die recently from Heroin use, i happen to do a lot of youth work in my area so i do not have my head in the sand but stuck well out of it . the young people i interact with couldn't care less if the heroin was legal or not their addicts why would they? most of them are on treatment and take their Methadone that's prescribed by the doctor as well as heroin they buy from other kids just like them selves. i know dozens of repeat offenders that go to jail for theft so yes you can stop that repeat offending by giving heroin away that would do the trick.

It doesn't make a blind bit of difference at the sharp end if the stuff comes from the government or organised crime because addicts are at the bottom of the pyramid and couldn't care less who sells it to them as long as they do sell it to hem.

Mercy Not Sacrifice · Jul 12, 2010

The thing is, kai, heroin is not nearly as profitable when sold on the legal market as it is on the black market.

Mister Emu · Jul 12, 2010

I think it is valid to question whether drugs should be legalised...

At some point, however, activities are harmful enough to society that even if there is a correlation between legalisation and a drop in the activity, it would still not be acceptable to legalise it. I'm not sure that some drugs do not fall into that.

justbehappy · Jul 12, 2010

dust1n said:
[youtube]R7FshBjkS6U[/youtube]
YouTube - Portugal legalizes drugs. Crime/Usage falls.

When people are bored, they rebel.
Of course not all drug users would stop, but a lot of people would find its lost its fun factor.

justbehappy · Jul 12, 2010

Smoke said:
Well, I am and always have been a civil libertarian. Economics is where I part company with the Libertarian Party. I think illegal drugs should be legalized, and then we should tax the bejesus out of them.

In my perfect Leah world (my name), I would tax it. But honestly, I don't really find any logic in it :/ And so I wouldn't put this belief on others.

justbehappy · Jul 12, 2010

mball1297 said:
That's true. I just mean that I don't consider myself a libertarian, but I do share many of their beliefs.

It's just like religion. You agree with certain things of one but disagree with others, so no one ever knows what to call themselves. Conservative Libertarian is the best name I can find for myself, but on some issues I probably go against that title.

kai · Jul 12, 2010

Mercy Not Sacrifice said:
The thing is, kai, heroin is not nearly as profitable when sold on the legal market as it is on the black market.

supply and demand though isn't it! Dealers suck you in by giving you credit and like i said its dirt cheap here anyway, the addicts just need more and more and don't give a hoot whether its legal or not. The only way you put dealers out of business is make the drug disappear or give it away. Our problems not with personal possession never has been its about how addicts get the money to buy the stuff and that's through petty crime and lots of it. now if it was free there wouldn't be a problem except for who pays to bury them.

Magic Man · Jul 12, 2010

kai said:
well how many people go to jail for personal possession then ? as well as having a life long friend die recently from Heroin use, i happen to do a lot of youth work in my area so i do not have my head in the sand but stuck well out of it . the young people i interact with couldn't care less if the heroin was legal or not their addicts why would they? most of them are on treatment and take their Methadone that's prescribed by the doctor as well as heroin they buy from other kids just like them selves. i know dozens of repeat offenders that go to jail for theft so yes you can stop that repeat offending by giving heroin away that would do the trick.

It doesn't make a blind bit of difference at the sharp end if the stuff comes from the government or organised crime because addicts are at the bottom of the pyramid and couldn't care less who sells it to them as long as they do sell it to hem.

You have your head in the sand because you refuse to try to understand what we're talking about. If drugs were legal, they wouldn't come from the government, and they wouldn't be given away.

The fact is people go to jail for simple possession of drugs. That's stupid. Some people are going to do drugs regardless of whether they're legal, and that's part of the point. Whether or not they're legal, those kids you're talking about are going to do them, so we might as well make them legal and only prosecute them for theft and other crimes rather than possession or distribution of drugs. That's obviously not helping anything.

kai · Jul 12, 2010

Mball i think your being naive and i will tell you why.

in my country the "UK " ciggarretes and alcohol are legal but smuggled and counterfiet cigarretes and alcohol are big business a lot of the people that deal in these items also deal drugs now why would legalising personal possession stop them selling druggs? why would legalising the sale of drugs stop smugglers selling drugs unles they were so cheap as to not being worth the bother or even free. there is nothing that is for sale on a legal basis that isnt for sale on the black market now is there?

and how does any of that ease the plague that is heroin addiction and the crime wave that follows it in my country tell me? because they can buy it in a shop ? so what ! they can buy it now ----they have to get the money to buy it first and like i said ask any addict they dont give a monkeys if its legal or not--- their addicts.

Ok dont prosecute them for drugs, just the crimes they commit to get the drugs and again big deal! hows that going to help?

Portugal decriminalizes drugs; Crime/Usage falls.

Well-Known Member

Reaper of Conversation

Zindīq

tri-polar optimist

Well-Known Member

ragamuffin

ragamuffin

ragamuffin

ragamuffin

Well-Known Member

Reaper of Conversation

ragamuffin

Well-Known Member

Emu Extraordinaire

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

ragamuffin

Reaper of Conversation

ragamuffin