3 votes

If you were going to legalize drugs, how would you do it?

I've seen a lot of people advocate for the legalisation of drugs, but I've never seen a concrete plan of how to go about it. I am an advocate as well, but I have also seen the destruction they can cause both to health and relationships. I know that most of the problems come from them being illegal, but some of them have addictive properties that need to be addressed. Even though it is highly unlikely that all drugs will ever BE legalized, because they make too much money off of them being illegal, I still thought it would be an interesting question to pose here.

Legalising MJ is a no brainer, but what about the harder stuff, cocaine, heroin, meth, prescription drugs like oxycontin, etc.? Are there examples of other countries being successful with full legalisation?

How would it be distributed?
How would a distribution center operate?
Would you have privacy when you went to that distribution center, or would you have to show ID?
Would there be a ration, or limit to how much an individual could purchase in a day?
Who would own and run a distribution center, private sector or Govt.?
What about people who chose to sell outside of a distribution center,
would that be illegal?
What if someone who just turned 21 came into the distribution center and wanted to try heroin or crack for the first time? Would they be allowed, or would there be an attempt to try and talk them out of it?

What about people on public assistance?
Would they be allowed to do "illicit" drugs?
Should they be drug tested?
Should we have to pay for people on welfare that are addicted to hard drugs and claim that as a "disability?"

What about employers? Could they discriminate if drugs were legal?

What about people who have or are responsible for children?
How would a child be protected from a parent or guardian that chooses to stay in the bathroom and do coke or meth all day to the point of psychosis, or be passed out on heroin?

What about driving?
Would you want to be on the roads with someone who is nodding off (falling asleep) on heroin? (I know it's similar to being drunk)
What about MJ? It's pretty obvious that MJ doesn't impair peoples' driving like alcohol does.
How would that work with the police? Would they be able to test you on the spot? How would they do that?
If you say they couldn't, then wouldn't alcohol testing be banned as well?

What about insurance, and healthcare?
Would you have to submit to testing to get either or both?

Some of these may sound like silly questions, and they may be, but they are questions that popped into my head as I was pondering this. We know that prohibition doesn't work. Where there is a demand, there will always be a supply. The intricacies of actually supplying it, and dropping the bottom out of the illegal market is where it seems to get complex.
What other questions or solutions do you have?

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

If you want us government off

If you want us government off your backs in each state then you have to remove it from state law. Only then can that stop the government, just as it did with alcohol. If you just decriminalize the government will continue in each and every state, like it or not, that is the law.

Complete legalization, of everything, immediately

That is the proper approach on ethical and practical grounds.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

Decriminalize, replace with

Decriminalize, replace with regulation (regulation is not the same as criminalization, and prevents drugs from being sold to underage kids, etc while not having criminal penalties that put people in jail); and put regulation back into the hands of the State governments.

That isn't as far as some advocate, but it's the best way to go no matter how little government you think there should be. It's also in line with how it historically was and the constitution.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

Or local town level, but I

Or local town level, but I see turning federal control back to the states more likely. But keep going in this direction, until involvement in town government is by consent. Basically, voluntary local government. One size does not fit all.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

We should repeal all drug

We should repeal all drug laws and let the free market take over. This would help the gangs and "thugs" because we'd allow them to become entrepreneurs.

Any rules regarding the use should be by the parents, not the state.

Ignore it

I would legalize it by ignoring it. Simply not make it an issue. Now that would be a breath of freedom. Like a cool drink of water.

God forgives always. Man forgives sometimes. But Nature never forgives.

What's so hard to understand?

Don't lock people in cages for exercising self-ownership over their own bodies.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com

"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

Drugs are Already Legal in America

All you have to do is go to your local neighborhood Doctor and you can get whatever you want. More people are addicted to "medicine" then all the other drugs combined. And its perfectly socially acceptable! "My doctor gave it to me!" The drug war is just an excuse for the big pharma/government co-op to crush the competition and collect more money for themselves. Government seizures of cash/personal property from the competition is commonplace.

I say everything should be

I say everything should be decriminalized. You should be able do what ever you want up to the point of infringing upon another's life liberty or property. Police should only have one job to do: to apprehend an individual that infringed upon another individuals life liberty or property. I would also hope that the penalties for that infringement would be far more severe then they are now, so dangerous individuals that have harmed another can rot in a cage where they belong.

I just don't get this fear mentality. Why would anyone care what someone else is doing if they aren't hurting anyone? Why are 90% of arrests in this country for individuals that harmed no one?

Jefferson's picture

The illegality

and profitability is what mostly makes them dangerous. So when there is such a high markup and expense, combined with an addiction, people rob, steal, and kill to protect their sales turf or support their habit.
I would imagine that's where some of the fear mentality comes from.

Most of the time I see "the children" being brought up when people argue against legalisation. How do you protect minors, or the unborn, or does one operate on the assumption that a mother's unborn child is her property, and she can do as she likes with it.

The fear mentality I speak of

The fear mentality I speak of is the fear of freedom. The fear that a free person might do something unsafe. I'm not afraid of freedom. I'm not afraid of speeders or drunk drivers. I'm not afraid that someone else's children might do drugs, heck I don't really care about other peoples children.

Children should be considered 'property' of the parents until they're old enough to take care of themselves. The parent should be able to do anything they want to the child except infringe upon its life liberty or property. Minors would be protected the same way adults would be.

I don't care about anything anyone does as long as they aren't infringing upon another individuals life liberty or property and I don't see why anyone else would care either.


Well, I'd use English I suppose...and tell all to "Have at it".

Then I'd sit back and watch the Darwin Effect quickly cull the herd...followed by a serious decline in demand.

Wha? .....hey....who stole my country?

Jefferson's picture


dad talks about piling crack and pipes on all of the street corners and saying the same thing you did, but he's actually serious.

So who would pay for it?

There has to be some responsibility for those who can't protect themselves like children? So how would that work? The parent OD's on something, therefore they are yanking themselves out of the gene pool, should their kids be yanked as well? Who's going to care for them?

It doesn't seem to be that easy of a solution on the surface. Maybe I'm missing something.

Pay for it?

Dude, I don't know if you understand the cost of our criminal justice system, but I can assure you...cremation is quite a bit cheaper.

Protect the children? Oh God...haven't we had enough of "protecting the children" yet? If you never taken courses on child psychology...or grown up in a fully dysfunctional family, you'd not know that "protecting the children" is a complete impossibility unless it is YOU that wants to take feral children in and somehow pray your way to reversals of severe cases of Reactive Attachment Disorder...or one of a plethora of other "disorders" that stem from such environments. At some point you either have to plug up the bleeding heart crap in the face of reality...or step up to the plate and put your time, home and heart where your rhetoric is...otherwise...can it. No current program...after a life-time of effort has been able to "help the children"...not yet...not ever. And legalization in no way equals "increase of occurrence".

If a child has grown to cognizance in an addict riddled household or family, their environment is almost always decided by inter-generational dysfunction handed down through families via the procreation process and any such child's viability is severely under question and one in which the odds are stacked against them EVER reaching a level of productivity that would have them here debating with you about monetary policy...or Liberty or..."helping the children".

Will some "make it"? Sure...some of us do...despite the influence of our parents. But our fight for viability is life-long...or by my calculation...at least 55 years now....and no state funded/directed "program" ensures anything but more abuse at the hands of others who place themselves into positions within such systems to take advantage of the easy pickens.

Again, cull the herd and lessen the growth of the dysfunction and stop buying into the fantasy thinking that State run "programs for the children" will ever be anything but gloried warehousing of mostly future criminality.

Sorry for the painfully blunt position...no...I guess I'm not.

Wha? .....hey....who stole my country?

Jefferson's picture

I meant

who would pay for the drugs? (and the cremation for that matter)

And I'm just playing devil's advocate with the "children" argument. I'm not taking that position. I've seen far too many dubious things be legislated in the name of "protecting the children."

So you're basically saying that if a parent neglects a child because they have a drug habit, that it is just the way the cookie crumbles?

Don't they have some basic rights?


...are you just being obtuse now? Do I really have to go into a dissertation on the current and long standing roll the governments of the world have instituted for the disposal of indigents?

The idiots who want to take the drugs would ...of course...be the ones who pay for them...at severely reduced prices.

My friend..this is Earth that you are currently taking up space upon and it isn't a pretty place. Parental neglect and abuse happens...way too often. And the rights of those neglected and abused would hardly be impacted under a regime of tolerance...something I'm sure you are painfully aware of. The planet of Polyanna is light years away.

The paradigm of abuse exists...plain and simple...in varying degrees of evil and effectiveness. This will NEVER change. There are plenty of laws on the books regarding the proper care and feeding of a child and the "criminal justice system" has never been adequate (nor will it ever be) to reverse this "Law of Humanity"...but I suppose we'll continue to try.

The only thing that will lessen the number of occurrences is the reduction of those who would perpetrate such evil...before they can procreate and pass on their inter-generational and familial-established parenting skills.

Cookies crumble.

Wha? .....hey....who stole my country?

I would rather see

the Feds decriminalize them and let individual states decide.

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James