Illegal Drugs. Should they be illegal ?

[Skrah]

Those people are not that common and it would probably be a much better use of money to fund education so that kids don't think drug dealing is the only way to get money. If someone were to run a survey on this, I doubt many taxpayers would fund people getting high rather than more on education, health care, etc.

Education doesn't solve everything, although it could well be the cause of it. In Mexico, the majority of drug dealers left school in middle school. But it's also the people getting high. They don't care what a bunch of teachers tell them. They get high to look cool. It's the same as alcohol and cigarretes. People don't have a choice. They have to pay taxes. I'm not saying that we should raise taxes, but we could divert some of those taxes from other projects into this one.

We already have rehab centers.

They aren't very effective. People have to be willing to go. Rehabs don't look for addicts. In this project people would have to go there to get their fix, and thus be in rehab, wether they like it or not.

Well of course it won't change anything! But that's no reason to make them legal. Using this logic, one could say:

"Murdering people should be legal, it's not like keeping it illegal will make it any better!"

The point is by keeping them illegal we're keeping people from getting hurt and not wasting money.

I get your point. What I'm saying is that we should take action. Here is a small difference from what I'm proposing to what you used as an example though. We're not allowing people to get their fix wherever they want. They have to come to the clinic. That way no one gets hurt while he is under the effects.

Murdering is another case entirely. Murdering requires you killing someone. It would be different if it were suicide, since its self inflicted, like drugs. If we keep things as bad as they are we are not going to make any progress, and people will keep suffering.

Hotels cost a lot of money to run. You'd have to have:

1. "Guards" (int this case)
2. Janitors/maids to clean the rooms
3. Doctors and nurses, in case anyone overdoses or gets hurt

I know it costs money. Everything costs money. The money would be taken from taxes. I don't think that these clinics would have such an exorbitant price as the Army.

My point was that some of them will get addicted and end up staying in the place indefinitely to get a continuous supply of the drug.

Even those who aren't begging for more drugs as soon as they're cleared to leave will be trapped in the building for a large portion of the day and will have to be guarded an watched.

That would be the drawback of trying the drug, but it would be under the patient's own risk. To lower the risk, the portion of the drug would small. Patients wouldn't live in the clinic, they'd visit it when they need to have more drugs. As long as they have conscience, they could live outside. But as soon as they are going to get high, they enter the clinic and stay there until the effects wear off.

And I don't see what's wrong with people being in a clinic for some hours. It's not like they are bored or anything.

 

[KrazyGlue]

Education doesn't solve everything, although it could well be the cause of it. In Mexico, the majority of drug dealers left school in middle school. But it's also the people getting high. They don't care what a bunch of teachers tell them. They get high to look cool. It's the same as alcohol and cigarretes. People don't have a choice. They have to pay taxes. I'm not saying that we should raise taxes, but we could divert some of those taxes from other projects into this one.

I'm not saying education will solve everything, I'm saying it will help combat drug usage just as much as opening these clinics will, plus it will educate kids about other things as well making it generally more useful. We could help kids get a job and start a healthy lifestyle early on instead of spending the same amount of money to let them be less educated and get hooked on drugs first, and then try to help them.

Which sounds better:

1. The kid learns about drugs and never starts on them. The kid gets at least a moderate education, then goes to college and gets at least a decent job.

2. The kid doesn't have as good of an education. They get hooked on a drug during childhood and suffer brain damage. They go to this clinic and get rehab, but now have little education and have permanent damage from the drugs and will struggle to get a good job. They will have to spend time and money to go to vocational school if they want a decent job.

Of course this won't apply to everyone; some kids will get hooked anyway, or just not care what teachers say. But in general, it's better to prevent problems from happening instead of letting them happen and then trying to fix them.

They aren't very effective. People have to be willing to go. Rehabs don't look for addicts. In this project people would have to go there to get their fix, and thus be in rehab, wether they like it or not.

Well if the person knows they will have to go to rehab if they go to the clinic, then why would they go? And you can't force the person to participate in rehab anyway; they really have to be willing to do so. By making this clinic, you are encouraging drug use in the first place, anyway.

I get your point. What I'm saying is that we should take action. Here is a small difference from what I'm proposing to what you used as an example though. We're not allowing people to get their fix wherever they want. They have to come to the clinic. That way no one gets hurt while he is under the effects.

Murdering is another case entirely. Murdering requires you killing someone. It would be different if it were suicide, since its self inflicted, like drugs. If we keep things as bad as they are we are not going to make any progress, and people will keep suffering.

I wasn't really trying to make this a comparison to your idea, but more of an example as to why the logic of "it won't get better if we keep it illegal" is flawed.

I know it costs money. Everything costs money.

Money that could be much better spent on education, stimulus packages for our ailing economy, health care, and other things that are necessities.

The money would be taken from taxes. I don't think that these clinics would have such an exorbitant price as the Army.

Yes, but we actually need the army. If we took our army away, we would get bombed and attacked by the large amount of countries that hate us. But that's a different discussion.

The point is, we won't all die (or suffer any notable negative effects) if illegal drugs are kept illegal.

That would be the drawback of trying the drug, but it would be under the patient's own risk. To lower the risk, the portion of the drug would small. Patients wouldn't live in the clinic, they'd visit it when they need to have more drugs. As long as they have conscience, they could live outside. But as soon as they are going to get high, they enter the clinic and stay there until the effects wear off.

And I don't see what's wrong with people being in a clinic for some hours. It's not like they are bored or anything.

Yes but the person is going to crave more of the drug as soon as it wears off. It's not like it takes them a whole day to want the drug again.

 

[Skrah]

I'm not saying education will solve everything, I'm saying it will help combat drug usage just as much as opening these clinics will, plus it will educate kids about other things as well making it generally more useful. We could help kids get a job and start a healthy lifestyle early on instead of spending the same amount of money to let them be less educated and get hooked on drugs first, and then try to help them.

Which sounds better:

1. The kid learns about drugs and never starts on them. The kid gets at least a moderate education, then goes to college and gets at least a decent job.

2. The kid doesn't have as good of an education. They get hooked on a drug during childhood and suffer brain damage. They go to this clinic and get rehab, but now have little education and have permanent damage from the drugs and will struggle to get a good job. They will have to spend time and money to go to vocational school if they want a decent job.

Of course this won't apply to everyone; some kids will get hooked anyway, or just not care what teachers say. But in general, it's better to prevent problems from happening instead of letting them happen and then trying to fix them.

Wait, I'm not saying we should give lower quality education overall for the sake of the clinics, I'm saying that Drug education alone wouldn't help as much. Education should be given to children, but these clinics would help those who want to get drugged anyways.

So which one of these sounds better to you:

1) Someone gets drug education, but wants to try drugs out anyway. It'll make him look cool, and he'll feel amazing with drugs. He goes to a drug dealer/gang so he gets a supply of drugs. He gets high without anyone knowing. Various things can happen right now.

- He continues using drugs without anyone noticing. He ends up being addicted to the drug. He doesn't want anyone knowing that he uses drugs, but he doesn't have any money, so he steals from his parents. He buys more drugs. Parents get suspicious so he then steals from other people, and soon enough he starts mugging the streets. He either goes to jail or is busted by his parents and then forced to rehab.

-He tries it and didn't like it. He doesn't take any more drugs.

-He starts being involved with the drug dealers/gang.

-He causes an accident while high.

2) Same guy with same drug education. He still wants to try it. Knowing that the only source of drugs is in a government clinic he decides not to take drugs due to embarrassment.

-He goes to the clinic, tries a drug, stays in the clinic, then when the drug wears off he has a final check up and is free to leave.

-He gets hooked up and visits the clinic continuously while the clinic tries to help him through.

Well if the person knows they will have to go to rehab if they go to the clinic, then why would they go? And you can't force the person to participate in rehab anyway; they really have to be willing to do so. By making this clinic, you are encouraging drug use in the first place, anyway.

Because it's their only source of drugs. Parents can force their children to go to rehab, but older people might not want to go. But if they go to the clinic, they'd have to agree in staying there and getting help. How would it encourage drug use? It would offer drugs to anyone who still would try it elsewhere, but it wouldn't encourage drug use. They're not selling drugs. About the money thing, doctors inside the clinic could maybe charge a fee, but I don't think it's necessary.

I wasn't really trying to make this a comparison to your idea, but more of an example as to why the logic of "it won't get better if we keep it illegal" is flawed.

What I was trying to say is that we shouldn't be happy with things staying as they are. We should make an effort to protect the people and to raise their life's quality.

Money that could be much better spent on education, stimulus packages for our ailing economy, health care, and other things that are necessities.

That's a matter of opinion, and I really can't know for sure how things are going over there in the United States with the crisis.

Yes, but we actually need the army. If we took our army away, we would get bombed and attacked by the large amount of countries that hate us. But that's a different discussion.

The point is, we won't all die (or suffer any notable negative effects) if illegal drugs are kept illegal.

USA should stop waging war so the money needed is decreased.

And even though it's not the apocalypse, people are suffering because of it and needs to be put to a stop.

Yes but the person is going to crave more of the drug as soon as it wears off. It's not like it takes them a whole day to want the drug again.

Not everyone gets hooked the first time they try the drug. To further lower the chances, they would only have a small amount of drug to try. And patients that need the drug several times a day could spend all the time in the clinic until he is cured. The expenses could be covered by any relatives, or the patient could ask for a loan and then pay it when he is better.

 

[KrazyGlue]

Wait, I'm not saying we should give lower quality education overall for the sake of the clinics, I'm saying that Drug education alone wouldn't help as much. Education should be given to children, but these clinics would help those who want to get drugged anyways.

But I'm saying instead of throwing all this money into clinics it could be better spent educating people about drugs in the first place. There are plenty of poor schools and neighborhoods that could use the extra money. This would help reduce drug usage just as much, but also reduce violence in general.

So which one of these sounds better to you:

1) Someone gets drug education, but wants to try drugs out anyway. It'll make him look cool, and he'll feel amazing with drugs. He goes to a drug dealer/gang so he gets a supply of drugs. He gets high without anyone knowing. Various things can happen right now.

- He continues using drugs without anyone noticing. He ends up being addicted to the drug. He doesn't want anyone knowing that he uses drugs, but he doesn't have any money, so he steals from his parents. He buys more drugs. Parents get suspicious so he then steals from other people, and soon enough he starts mugging the streets. He either goes to jail or is busted by his parents and then forced to rehab.

-He tries it and didn't like it. He doesn't take any more drugs.

-He starts being involved with the drug dealers/gang.

-He causes an accident while high.

2) Same guy with same drug education. He still wants to try it. Knowing that the only source of drugs is in a government clinic he decides not to take drugs due to embarrassment.

-He goes to the clinic, tries a drug, stays in the clinic, then when the drug wears off he has a final check up and is free to leave.

-He gets hooked up and visits the clinic continuously while the clinic tries to help him through.

Like I said, some people will want to try drugs anyway, whether or not help is available. However, educating kids will deter some of them from using drugs. Plus, you seem to be forgetting the fact that if we funded education, we wouldn't be legalizing these drugs, so you can't really create a fair comparative scenario. In terms of the help/rehab part, see below.

Because it's their only source of drugs. Parents can force their children to go to rehab, but older people might not want to go. But if they go to the clinic, they'd have to agree in staying there and getting help.

First of all, they could still just go get the drug illegally. There probably won't be a massive decrease in that happening; considering the huge amount of underage drinkers I don't think people will be afraid of using these drugs outside of the clinic.

And even if they agree to "get help", they pretty much still have to want to know. If they don't care, they'll either ignore the instructor, or they'll be too intoxicated to remember anything that they are told within the clinic.

And now we're also talking about paying for rehab instructors as well; this project is starting to seem like it would crush our economy. This would have astronomical costs; it's like a rehab center and "hotel" combined, not to mention the fact that the government would have to get all these drugs and give them away for free. And if the government has to fund all of this, it'll either be a gigantic tax increase or a large cut to all other government funded things.

What I was trying to say is that we shouldn't be happy with things staying as they are. We should make an effort to protect the people and to raise their life's quality.

You're kind of acting like keeping these drugs illegal is causing some sort of huge national danger when it's really not. Legalizing dangerous drugs isn't really helping "protect" people. Like I said before, consider the fact that there are an enormous amount of underage drinkers. Some people aren't going to want to sit through a rehab lesson or drive potentially long distances to get to a clinic.

Legalizing these drugs will only increase their popularity. 11 percent of 8th graders, 22 percent of 10th graders, and 29 percent of 12th graders had been binge drinking within 2 weeks of the study conducted in the source below. There were also 5000 deaths resulting from underage drinking.

http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/AA67/AA67.htm

Clearly, may kids don't care if a substance is illegal for their age (or, in this case, their location) as long as the substance is legal somewhere.

 

[Skrah]

Are you sure money would be as big a problem as you're making it out to be? Because right now the only thing that could stop this from happening is the money involved.

Well, I thought it was a good option to keeping drugs illegalized. So, KrazyGlue, what do you propose exactly?

 

[w!zard]

money is ALWAYS a problem

 

[Sukai]

So you agree now? It's an online debate, we're not actually going to make this happen.

Au contrair.
I still think it's a ******** idea, but if you think it's viable option to handle addicts, then surely the higher ups will. Don't back down now. Yeah we are having a debate, but what weight does that pull on your opinion, if you feel strongly about this, then go for it, who's gonna stop you? Since you refuse to listen, maybe you need to learn the hard way that your idea won't work.

Are you sure money would be as big a problem as you're making it out to be? Because right now the only thing that could stop this from happening is the money involved.

Well, I thought it was a good option to keeping drugs illegalized. So, KrazyGlue, what do you propose exactly?

Do you know what you're saying?
Money is always a problem, when funding something, the budget is always taken into account. Taxes are already paying for less than what they used to, so now you want what little we're working with to go to this? We are in a recession, money is a huge, HUGE, concern. Legalizing drugs would cause alot of legal problems, on that factor alone, government money is already going to rehabs, but people locked away on charges of possession or using will have to be released by legal claim that their crime is no longer one. They get to go scott-free, they could be issued in an institution or rehab, but that's more tax money being spent, not only on the institution and rehab, but for the archive that issues them into one of those places, staff, general housing, transportation, the works. That's alot of money being used, which could go to better things, things that they were already going to before legalizing the drugs. Not no mention that when you are dealing with people as impulsive as addicts, keeping them in a controlled environment is just plain radical, especially when you allow them to keep using. Yeah, rehabs make them go cold turkey, and work with it. Ever saw a news report of people dying in rehab because of withdrawal? Not me, as far as I've heard, rehab works, this came from people who once were using, but made it out it took their life.
Rehab for the ones who can stop.
Prison for the ones who can't.
We don't need another institution, if you beg to differ, state your case to the house of reps, see what happens.

 

[Skrah]

Au contrair.
I still think it's a ******** idea, but if you think it's viable option to handle addicts, then surely the higher ups will. Don't back down now. Yeah we are having a debate, but what weight does that pull on your opinion, if you feel strongly about this, then go for it, who's gonna stop you? Since you refuse to listen, maybe you need to learn the hard way that your idea won't work.

There's a difference from chickening out and accepting that you're wrong. And how is it as ******** as you say?

Do you know what you're saying?
Money is always a problem, when funding something, the budget is always taken into account. Taxes are already paying for less than what they used to, so now you want what little we're working with to go to this? We are in a recession, money is a huge, HUGE, concern. Legalizing drugs would cause alot of legal problems, on that factor alone, government money is already going to rehabs, but people locked away on charges of possession or using will have to be released by legal claim that their crime is no longer one. They get to go scott-free, they could be issued in an institution or rehab, but that's more tax money being spent, not only on the institution and rehab, but for the archive that issues them into one of those places, staff, general housing, transportation, the works. That's alot of money being used, which could go to better things, things that they were already going to before legalizing the drugs. Not no mention that when you are dealing with people as impulsive as addicts, keeping them in a controlled environment is just plain radical, especially when you allow them to keep using. Yeah, rehabs make them go cold turkey, and work with it. Ever saw a news report of people dying in rehab because of withdrawal? Not me, as far as I've heard, rehab works, this came from people who once were using, but made it out it took their life.
Rehab for the ones who can stop.
Prison for the ones who can't.
We don't need another institution, if you beg to differ, state your case to the house of reps, see what happens.

I know that money is important. I was asking KrazyGlue if it was that much of a problem as to being an impossible project. I do not live in the United States. I don't know how bad it is over there. In my country it's not as bad. In other countries it surely isn't as bad as in the US. USA is not the only country out there, so think outside of it.

Drugs would be in the possession of the goverment only. Drug usage would only be permitted in the clinics, so it still would be a crime to have or use drugs anywhere outside of them.

Why would the addicts inside of a clinic be impulsive and aggresive when they get what they want, anyway?

They wouldn't be completely set aside from civilization. When being under the effects of drugs they would be placed into a room, but when he's not he would be free to leave the clinic.

 

[KrazyGlue]

Are you sure money would be as big a problem as you're making it out to be?

Well, first of all, the economy is pretty awful already; most extra spending will only hurt its condition. But the other thing is you have to consider the fact that you're essentially combining a hotel, rehab center, and free drug giveaway deal.

This means:

*Guard salaries and equipment

*Paying for such a large amount of drugs that the center won't run out of them when people want them AND making them costless

*Paying for maids who clean the hotel rooms and cleaning materials

*A medical staff in case somebody overdoses or is going through rehab and their body has a violent reaction

*Paying for professionals that have experience in helping drug addicts overcome their addiction and all the materials that the instructors need

*Activities for people to do while intoxicated

*Paying for the actual property and land

*At least some form of advertising so people know about it


Doesn't this sound like a lot of money to you? I'll try to find some stats on the costs of rehab centers and hotels, but it's doubtful that I will find anything. If this doesn't seem like a lot of money to you, I don't know what will.

Because right now the only thing that could stop this from happening is the money involved.

Actually, in my previous posts I have mentioned 2 alternate problems:

1. Likely a dismal approval rating from the population; nobody is going to like the sound of spending tax money on places that let people get high

2. It might not even help reduce violence from these drugs that much; look at the source I gave. Large amounts of kids drank (binged on) alcohol underage and 5000 died from it. By legalizing these drugs we will be increasing their popularity and many kids will end up taking them illegally to fit in, resulting in deaths similar to the ones that I mentioned above.

Well, I thought it was a good option to keeping drugs illegalized.

Really? I thought you wanted to make them legal, but only in the clinics...

So, KrazyGlue, what do you propose exactly?

I just want them to be kept illegal and no clinics. I thought I've made that clear throughout the thread.