[Sensei Ern]

I wrote this a year ago. I was reminded after listening to Michael Graham talking about those in congress considering making sudafed, et al, over the counter drugs because they are a key ingredient in meth.

I wonder how many people would die from over dosing. I suspect it would level off around 3% of the population of the U. S. That is about 7.5 million. That is just a WAG, so I could be wrong.

[need_a_screen_name]

"For many years, I have been a strong opponent of legalizing drugs."



I think decriminalizing drug use would be a better idea. Too many people sitting in jail for non-violent simple possession crimes. Let them out and make room for violent offenders.

[Socratic]

If drugs were to be legalized, they should be regulated like alcohol and cigarettes...have a legal purchasing age.

We already have what you desire. The doctor's prescription is the regulation and it also determines a legal purchasing age.

[TexasCajun]

If drugs were to be legalized, they should be regulated like alcohol and cigarettes...

Libertarians are welcome, just don't expect a lot of support.

Ya might even get a "Troll" alert for such statements.

[Paradox]

There are a number of Freepers in good standing who oppose the War On Drugs for various reasons. That is one of the issues that divides us here. It can get pretty contentious, but I think at the time, most agree to disagree politely, certainly not as bad as those Evolution vs Creationism threads!In general, I am a libertarian on the issue (against the WOD), but its not one of those things that is on the front burner, so to speak.

[mysterio]

But... But... If we let people treat their own pain, then someone might get high. And we all know that the most important issue in America is to keep those damned druggies from getting high. It was worth selling out our Bill of Rights, doncha know. Every day I feel a creeping fear that someone, somewhere might be getting high. And we can stop that from happening with the perfect new law. I recently realized that if we put everyone in jail whether they have commited an offense or not, we could probably keep everyone from getting high.

[softwarecreator]

Not bad for a "newbie" posting  =)

I don't use drugs and never will so I personally could not care less one way or another.  But ...

You make good points for advocating de-criminalization if drugs.  To me, it seems to be, "Why not"?  We are not stopping anyone from using them anyway and maybe we could take some of the tax burden off of smokers and drinkers and put it on drug users.

Question:  You screen name says "Senei", what are you a Sensei of?

[Terriergal]

Oh boy, you asked for it... :-)

[Crim]

The problem is viewing all substances as "equal"...

Anyone with an IQ over 50 knows hemp isnt as harmful as coke heroin, meth, or even abused alchohol..

Another problem is unequal enforcement...a coke user will only test positive for about 24-48 hrs...a hemp user will test positive for up to 28 days...

While a coke user will exhibit behavior traits and screw up a job...chances are...the hemp user has a family and works 40 hours a week safely...

The biggest problem is the ill gotten booty the state "steals' under the guise of forfieture...the "property" is accused of the crime....and given to the state free of charge...in many cases...without a "person" ever being charged with a crime...

Those of us who believe in personal responsibility think those who actually screw up should be held responsible....while the rest would simply like to be left alone to enjoy their "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness"...

Until their actions directly effect another adversely....they should be left alone....and leave resources for more important tasks...

Like catching killers and baby rapers and the scum that go out of their way to adversely effect other people...

my 2.5 cents.

Your mileage may vary

[my_pointy_head_is_sharp]

Another dentist did another root canal...and again did not get the whole root.

I find it unbelievable that a 2nd dentist also screwed up.

I also think your reasoning is specious. You went from debilitating pain, to thinking back to how drugs were prescribed 100 years ago, to legalizing drugs if you're of legal purchasing age. It doesn't quite ring true.

Nice try, though.

[MEGoody]

I called the emergency number only to be told I could see the doctor on Monday. TWO WHOLE DAYS IN EXTREME PAIN!

Not necessary. Go to an urgent care facility or the ER.

[Rakkasan1]

not sure legalizing or not would matter. kids often steal mom and dad's prescription drugs from home and half the little snots are now on Ritilin or similar stuff anyway.

got a problem, take a pill. hard to "just say no" when that's the way it is today and meth is easily made at home and readily available anywhere.

[k2blader]

If drugs were to be legalized, they should be regulated like alcohol and cigarettes...have a legal purchasing age.

So you think stuff like crystal meth should be legalized and "regulated"?

[Politicalities]

I wonder how many people would die from over dosing. I suspect it would level off around 3% of the population of the U. S. That is about 7.5 million. That is just a WAG, so I could be wrong.

Yeah, a WAG all right. Make sure you wipe it off real good; considering where you pulled it from it stinks to high heaven.

Illicit drugs (all illicit drugs, combined) are responsible for fewer than 20,000 deaths per year. Compare and contrast: over 400,000 deaths per year from tobacco use, about 90,000 deaths per year from alcohol use. The latter figure includes only those who die directly from alcohol poisoning; it does not include the tens of thousands of alcohol-related deaths from motor vehicle and other accidents. Do you really think that deaths from illicit drugs will increase by a factor of 375 were they legalized? Bear in mind that a significant percentage of even the relatively minuscule number of deaths from illicit drugs are directly caused by prohibition: deaths from adulterated substances that have no legal requirements for purity, deaths from accidental overdoses caused by unknown dosage levels thanks to an absence of labeling requirements.

Yeah. If drugs were legal, about 7.5 million people would die from them. Right. This is 11 times more Americans than are killed annually by heart disease, 13 times more Americans than are killed annually by cancer, 71 times more Americans than are killed annually by accidents, and more than 3 times more Americans than are killed annually... by all causes. Brother, I want some of what you're smoking.

[downtoliberalism]

I have never understood victimless crimes.

[softwarecreator]

Sensei Ern,

Are you going to answer any question that anyone asks or respond to any of the posts?

[headsonpikes]

For many years, I have been a strong opponent of legalizing drugs

I'm certain you'll find no quarrels here.

After all, who but a control freak socialist would want the government to decide what a person should do for their own health?

I think everyone would agree that here at FreeRepublic.com, we are in absolute unison with regard to this matter.

[caver]

"Is the Drug War a Conservative or Liberal Issue?"

The drug war is a control issue. It doesn't matter the political leaning. It's all about the politicians and the government writing laws to control you life. Plain and simple.

[aruanan]

Is the Drug War a Conservative or Liberal Issue? (Warning: I am a Newbie to starting posts)

It's a statist issue, pushed by people who believe that they can utopianize the world if only they are given enough government power and resources to do it. Both "conservatives" and liberals are pretty much two sides of the same coin any more when it comes to the concept of using government power to radically change the world into a new and better (that is, in conformity with their own hopes, wishes, and dreams) place. They both seem completely blind to the fact that this was tried by the Soviets, the Nazis, the Red Chinese, and Pol Pot (among others) with only disastrous results. The liberals' excuse is that they are just as blind as ever. The conservatives have no excuse at all.

[dinasour]

The war on drugs is portrayed as competing solutions, the drug warriors have their's, the libertarians have a different solution.

I believe the reality is that there is no solution, just a set of competing problems.

It is true that the war on drugs is itself destroying lives that would not otherwise be destroyed. On the other hand, having a crack stand at your local 7-Eleven would just destroy a different set of lives.

The situation is somewhat like the "paradox of inoculation". At some point, if a vaccine program is successful, your risk of having a side effect of the vaccine exceeds the risk actually getting the disease. But if you stop vaccinations, many more will get sick.

Likewise, if we make these extremely addictive and seductive substances easily available, even if we could restrict it to adults, would society be able to function with maybe, one third of the population stoned most of the time?

Would it really be that bad? I don't know. The only model we have in western society is alcohol and tobacco which are pretty mild compared to modern narcotics.

[WhiteGuy]

Is the Drug War a Conservative or Liberal Issue?

IMHO, neither.

It is a big government issue.

And

It is a failure