Do the benefits of criminalizing drug use outweigh its disadvantages (i.e. organized crime etc...)?
90296
Thru-out history drug laws have been a means of oppression towards ppl of different religions and customs. The 1st drug law in the US. was in san franscio in 1875 on opium dens in china town, and the fear of white ppl that this will cause chinese immigrants to rape white women. All drug laws started out of racism, not any concern over health or human welfare.\nRead about the history of drug laws at wikipedia link below. \n Currently 23% of US. prison population are non violent drug offenders.\n\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/drug_laws...
245183
A. Drug users need money, usually don't work (or can't, many employers won't hire a drug user) so they have to steal.\nB. Drugs make people do things they would normally wouldn't do, and make them more violent, so they could start a fight over nothing.\nC. Selling, buying and using drugs is illegal so it is a crime in it's self.
614424
I see where you are going with this (after re-reading it like five times) \n\nI think that often yes, we do spend an awful lot of time defending laws against things that don't really have a clear victim. But you need to trust that those laws are there to deter worse crimes. Drugs breed violence, think of all the murders that happen over drugs.\n\nI can't answer this question with any authority, perhaps you should take an associate justice class at your local community college. I'm sure they cover all of these issues.
538629
I think all drugs should be legalized, and I havent touched anything harder than alcohol in the last 10 years. If the US legalized everything, here are some of the advantages:\n\n1) They would tax it. Hopefully this would get them to ease up on some of the other things that are taxable. Additionaly maybe we could work off some national debt, use the money for medical and scientific research and other benificial things.\n2) Crime would go down. Many crimes are committed (ie armed robbery, breaking and entering, etc...) are commited to raise money for drugs. Since the government would be the ones selling and pruducing the drugs, there would no longer be drug dealers on our streets, forcing them to find other means of income. \n3) We would weed out a lot of society. My theory is that within the first 6 months of legalization, we would eradicate many of the junkies, simply due to overindulgence. Many of them would simply OD due to having a vast supply of their favorite drugs. \n3) I think there would actualy be a reduction in drug use. Many people use drugs for the simple reason that they are something that is illegal. \n4) We would free up prison space for actual violent offenders. More than half of the prison system today is filled with people who just had felonious amounts of drugs on them, as opposed to killers, rapists, child molestors, etc...that we allow to walk free. \n\nThats just a few of the reasons i believe they should be legalized. Of course we would also have to have strict rules and regulations for use. Some jobs would have to be exempt from these legalizations for obvious reasons, such as doctors, public engineers, professional drivers, and others that would have a reasonable potential for affecting others lives in a negative way. \n\nOk, thats long enough. Theres a lot of other things that i would say, but ill leave some space for others to answer.
1175889
Yes, the people can decriminalize drug use and provide alcohol drug abuse counseling, therapy, housing, medical treatment with educational and employment opportunities for those who are successfully into recovery.\nSound expensive, will we are not talking about just giving drugs out the backdoor. I worked for a non-profit that does a great job with this considerably less money than a profit type company can do, and the non-profit can do it better. \nMost of the Case Managers can be Peer-Counselor with Professional Supervision. \nJust think about all the money we will save if prison space is opened up,  the cost of Policing these problems are lowered, and you can start shutting down the War On Drugs because it is a giant dollar drain. I guarantee the results would be absolutely fantastic. \nIf you don't believe me, get some information on a non-profit named Swords To Plowshares in San Francisco. Ask for the Manager Michael Blecker.
684953
these are all stupid ideas & are proven not to work. 3 strikes law only insures the judicial system is bogged with cases better served by fines. death penalty is no deterant; crackheads still kill for a hit, husbands & wives still kill of jelousy & insurance scams, bent minds are still preditors & kids still enact the rapsong in pursuit of their 'rep'. same thing with life. rehab is useless as those who are criminal remain criminal & those who are marginally criminal are better served in society & working, feeding the economy & paying heavy fines & restitution. more prisons means more taxes & a worse human product upon release. halfways can be lucrative but are the same as rehab. i spent 3 years in prison for a pot charge. no violent history, no victims, ect. the idea that society is victimized is absurd. the same rational could be said relating tbhhe number of traffic deaths to exceeding the speed limit. there are various levels of offense. murfer isnt necessarilly the worst if its accidental or inpersonal. the mind is the key & is subject to its environment. a mind thats compylsively violent, locked away, labor, suicide missions, ....not much for them. nonviolent crimes are best taken by case & usually are better served as revenue (fines & restitution). too long of an answer emil me if you want more of my input.
387789
No.\n\nPeople and problems can make you vulnerable to using drugs. \n\nUse prevention to avoid falling into the vicous circle of drugs. \n\nSuch as, don't hang with these kinds of people, get a healthy support group, like healthy friends to be around in time of trouble and stuff like that.
850834
It should be, but it will take a long long time.\nDuring the prohibition of alcohol, organized crime was extremely enhanced.  The only crime that dropped was spousal abuse.\nWhen you're high on pot, for example, you don't really feel like smacking anyone.  But that isn't the point.  The point is that the price will come down, our prisons will practically empty (saving tax dollars).\nOne of the strongest groups OPPOSING legalization is the prison guard union.  Illegal drugs make for more prisoners, which means more prisons and more guard jobs.\nIronically, two of the worst drugs as far as public health, alcohol and tobacco, are legal.\nThis website (started by an ex-police chief) called "Law Enforcement Against Prohibition" might interest you:  http://www.leap.cc/
524419
No, they are not, though I'm sure by the tone of your question, my chances at "best answer" just dramatically dropped.  \n\nVice laws are a reflection of the wants/needs of a community. The problem is that prostitution and drugs bring with them a whole slew of other problems - homicide, robbery, homelessness, all sorts of public disorder/nuisance issues.  Where you have drugs, you are always going to have addicts, and where you have addicts, you are always going to have property crimes.  \n\nIn addition, consider this - There is currently an ordinance in my City that says that I cannot hold a garage sale in my front yard.  Do you honestly think a community that cares where the friggin' garage sale is held is ready to loosen up in regard to vice?
781437
I think so, for a couple of reasons.  \n\n1) Teen drug use is lower in countries like Amsterdam, which have legalized it. \n2) More law enforcemnet money can be spent on the "harder" drugs like meth, coke, herion, etc.--I consider those drugs much more of a danger to society.  This would take a burden off our jails too. \n3)  Decriminalizng Marijuana would give many minor drug offenders a shot at a better life--FYI, you are unable to get any financial aid for college if you are any type of drug offender, even a Misdemeanor!!  That only helps to continue the cycle of poverty/drug use/dealing, etc. \n4)  Tax the crap out of it and we could pay off our national debt! \n5) Marijuana has the potential to be an effective treatment for many people with various ailments, such as glaucoma, cancer, etc.\n\nCool class you are taking, never written papers like that before.
203771
It is no difference than like the war on drugs, big money. The government can and trying to stop the flow of drugs in this country but do they want it to stop, no. If did they would lose 3/4 of their police force. Within the borders of this great nation they wouldn't be able to seize land and vehicles, hire more personnel, court systems have to layoff 1/2 of their judges, layoff prison guards, quit building more prisons and lawyers will become homeless. It is always about money. Back to the question, for the last 10 years the courts have managed to get lawsuits pass on major cigarette companies for persons dying from cancer. They can no longer sponsor a race car or advertise on TV. But does this really hurt the tobacco industry, no. The government doesn't want to outlaw tobacco, they will no longer collect taxes for them. "Money". I did read somewhere last year of a national report that the young American people now days are less likely to start smoking than like 20 years ago. So if there become less smokers in this country don't worry, taxes always get higher and the sale overseas is still increasing every year.
26154
Sin/Use taxes are somewhat better than illegalizing sin/use completely.  At least then the ills caused by the sin or damage by the use are paid for by those doing the sin/use.  Example: Road use..polution.. gas tax, is both a use and sin tax.    \n\nStill Illegalizing sin is somewhat (arguably) better than flaunting immoral activities to our children.  Sins will never be black or white issues they will allways be subjective.  This is usually where society gets all messed up.  We get on one or the other side and assume there is only one right answer in the Drugs, Right to live or die debates.  \n\nCongrats on your kicking the habit I lost all of my grand parents 3 of them to lung cancer and / or alchohol related issues in their early late 50s early 60s. If you ever saw the lungs of a heavy smoker or even the relative of one or bar owner in a smoking establishment...  \n\nNormally we ignore the effects our sins have on others.  I do agree however that Nazi approaches and attitudes toward siners have to go as well.  WWJD\n\nCheers,
811897
The current drug laws really don't make sense and your idea has merit. There are always going to be drug users. Decrimiinalization will not make more drug users. It will reduce petty crime and strike a serious blow to organized crime.\n\nUnfortunately, it would also make tens of thousands of government employees useless. They would have nothing to do and their bosses would lose their little empires. We can't have that, now can we? After all, it's only taxpayer funds they are wasting on a lost cause.
825233
I would much rather see the murders caught then seeing a drug bust for marijuana.\n\nI think for harder drugs they should provide more help for possession then incarceration.  These people are addicted--not criminals.\n\nFor the dealers I believe in incarceration, counseling, education, and rehab for these people.  They should know about the lives they have ruined--by dealing to a child who OD and died.  They should deal with the consequences of their actions.\n\nI feel the system is not working well.  To many times do these addicts and dealers get out to do the same things again.
101097
There are so many reasons why I think it would be beneficial. I'd also like to say that this issue is VERY different from legalizing drugs. The 'oldest proffession' I believe, will never go away. Unlike drugs, humans are hard wired to copulate, we have no basic need to abuse drugs.\n\n1. You can regulate and tax it. That would in turn would provide for medical checkups and keep std's in check. Revenue would increase for the city/state and less std's will also save the city/state money.\n\n2. It would clean up the streets. Prostitutes would not be seen on the streets nor would pimps. Very stiff penalties for anyone prostituting without a license on the street. Property values would surely benefit.
730346
I would be less worried when I did drugs and would have a way to get them that didn't encourage organized crime....but I wouldn't steal, rape, murder....and no I wouldn't even steal from the giant chains....\n\ni wouldn't be happy if heoin, crack or meth were legal though...
52173
You can't make such a broad generalization.  The statement might not even be true.  Each state or territory might have different sentencing requirements for each each.  The federal government will have its own set of sentencing guidelines as well.  There are so many factors that go into sentencing, your question is not really valid.\n\nSentencing for drugs can be based on many factors, including the nature of the charge, the quantity of drugs involved and whether the drugs were for personal use or distribution.\n\nTo simply assert that cocaine convictions result in higher prison terms than manslaughter convictions without supporting evidence is a logical fallacy.