War on Drugs Cant Be Won, According to Global Leaders

End the war brah.....seriously... time to release our POWs..... seriously brah

Global leaders call for a major shift to decriminalize drugs - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110601/ts_yblog_thelookout/global-leaders-call-for-a-major-shift-to-decriminalize-drugs)

Legalize it!

Not only can it not be won, it was never a fair fight to begin with. From the beginning of time humans have sought ways to alter their reality. Decriminalizing is the only smart way to "fight" drugs. Locking people up is just silly and a huge waste of $$ and resources.

Are we saying like all drugs or just like pot? Becasue if meth was legal we have a nation of zombies.

I'm all for legalizing weed, but not stuff like coke, heroin, etc. The harder stuff should be decriminalized though.

It is and has always been a public health issue. Regulate - but don't prohibit - its production, marketing and availability. Penalize it's "misuse" (i.e. driving, working, etc. while stoned; selling to minors; increased penalties for committing crimes while on regulated drugs, etc.). If you want to safely sit in your abode, smoke a billion joints, and ruin your life, fine - so long as your stupidity doesn't endanger me or mine.

Problem, of course, is two fold:

First, regardless of how well regulated, drugs will always have a large blackmarket b/c regulation is costly and adds to the cost of the product (who is going to know if I got my pot from a licensed seller or my neighbor growing plants illegally downstairs? - If I do so, am I fined? Do I go to jail? etc.). Also, sort a subsidiary of this, will all narcotics be legal? Arguably, some drugs may simply be unsafe regardless of regulation - Can I buy meth? PCP? While not "Reefer Madness", users of these drugs may not be able to effectively insulate their "altered reality" from the rest of us.

Second, and the larger problem I think, is that drug use has public health implications beyond it's immediate use. While the public harm is not as obvious, addiction is a costly drain. Readily accessible narcotics increase the likelihood of additiction and a resultant increased cost for both treatment of the addiction and for medical "injuries" resulting from the addiction. (Yes, I know alchohol and tobacco already create this and they are legal. Just pointing out we would be creating more such risks/costs).

While "decriminalization" always seems like a panacea, it is not the end all and be all. New and different costs will occur, some forseeable, some not.

With that said, and again, you want to smoke some pot in your house? Knock your bad self out.

I'm all for legalizing weed, but not stuff like coke, heroin, etc. The harder stuff should be decriminalized though.

Wait, if we are not "legalizing ... stuff like coke", but we are decriminalizing it, what are you suggesting? Can I snort coke in my house or not? Can I carry it around with me? Can I get a license to sell it? What about meth? Can I be arrested for mere possession? If I can possess it, I guess I can use it? Do I have to use it in a supervised manner or can I use it in my home? Around my kids? Around your kids?

etc. etc. etc.

Wait, if we are not "legalizing ... stuff like coke", but we are decriminalizing it, what are you suggesting? Can I snort coke in my house or not? Can I carry it around with me? Can I get a license to sell it? What about meth? Can I be arrested for mere possession? If I can possess it, I guess I can use it? Do I have to use it in a supervised manner or can I use it in my home? Around my kids? Around your kids?

etc. etc. etc.

For starters: reduce the severity of the penalties for possession, and definitely don't toss people in prison for using.

It is and has always been a public health issue. Regulate - but don't prohibit - its production, marketing and availability. Penalize it's "misuse" (i.e. driving, working, etc. while stoned; selling to minors; increased penalties for committing crimes while on regulated drugs, etc.). If you want to safely sit in your abode, smoke a billion joints, and ruin your life, fine - so long as your stupidity doesn't endanger me or mine.

Problem, of course, is two fold:

First, regardless of how well regulated, drugs will always have a large blackmarket b/c regulation is costly and adds to the cost of the product (who is going to know if I got my pot from a licensed seller or my neighbor growing plants illegally downstairs? - If I do so, am I fined? Do I go to jail? etc.). Also, sort a subsidiary of this, will all narcotics be legal? Arguably, some drugs may simply be unsafe regardless of regulation - Can I buy meth? PCP? While not "Reefer Madness", users of these drugs may not be able to effectively insulate their "altered reality" from the rest of us.

Second, and the larger problem I think, is that drug use has public health implications beyond it's immediate use. While the public harm is not as obvious, addiction is a costly drain. Readily accessible narcotics increase the likelihood of additiction and a resultant increased cost for both treatment of the addiction and for medical "injuries" resulting from the addiction. (Yes, I know alchohol and tobacco already create this and they are legal. Just pointing out we would be creating more such risks/costs).

While "decriminalization" always seems like a panacea, it is not the end all and be all. New and different costs will occur, some forseeable, some not.

With that said, and again, you want to smoke some pot in your house? Knock your bad self out.


1. Why are drugs on the black-market inherently expensive? Even buying prescription drugs costs a pretty penny.
2. Would you rather buy alcohol and cigarettes from your neighbor downstairs or some guy on a corner or state liquor store and grocery stores?
3. Black-market drug producers have costs beyond the cost of the drugs themselves. How much less could these cost be compared to Phillip Morris and Pfizer?
4. Will making drugs legal increase consumption? How would legalization compare to current state of affairs?
5. Are soft drugs really a gateway to hard drugs?
6. What can we learn from are certain EU countries like the Netherlands and Spain and their drug policies?
7. Have you seen "Reefer Madness?"

bM_vLk1I6G4

Just seems like a terrible idea if you ask me. Making drugs like coke, meth, and heroine legal just seems like a great way to cause problems. I'm still reminded of an episode of bait car where a crazy guy on meth stole a car and went crazy while driving it.

Pot should probably be legal, but having experienced living next to and with pot heads it's not something I'm exactly eager to legalize. Plus the legalize pot movement overreaches when explaining the benefits of marijuana.

For example how it would replace narcotic pain relievers even though the only type of pain pot has been proven to relieve is nagging pain like arthritis and nerve pain. Not extreme pain that people experience after surgery.

I guess part of it is because Pot is more popular with the alternative medicine crowd that vilify doctors and think that Chiropractors and acupuncturist are legitimate medical professionals. So all of a sudden pot can treat everything from pain to color blindness. And people seem to be willing to run with it because for years the side effects of pot use have been overstated, so people making claims opposite of the "establishment" get the benefit of the doubt.

In the end pot is probably one of the most overrated plants on Earth. According to some it's the solution to a medical encyclopedic worth of illnesses and conditions as well as the perfect raw material to help industry reduce cost. When in fact it's simply a recreational drug that can help with a narrow scope of medical symptoms, while avoiding the type of damage that comes with long term use of drugs like alcohol.

Like I said probably should be legal but also just as dangerous might be the outrageous claims coming from the legalize pot movement.

Medical marijuana has been promoted for "compassionate use" to assist people with cancer, AIDS, and glaucoma. Scientific studies show the opposite is true; marijuana is damaging to individual with these illnesses. In fact, people suffering with AIDS and glaucoma are being used unfairly by groups whose real agenda is to legalized marijuana.

· AIDS: Scientific studies indicate marijuana damages the immune system, causing further peril to already weakened immune systems. HIV-positive marijuana smokers progress to full-blown AIDS twice as fast as non-smokers and have an increased incidence of bacterial pneumonia.

· Cancer: Marijuana contains many cancers-causing substances, many of which are present in higher concentrations in marijuana than tobacco.

· Glaucoma: Marijuana does not prevent blindness due to glaucoma

Also before you call me a hypocrite remember I don't drink (anymore) and I would fully support making cigarettes illegal. I only say this because the most common response to my "indifference" on pot seems to be "what about alcohol, how can you support alcohol/cigarettes and not pot?"