Oh good....I was hoping we could find a way to jack up the number of heroin addicts on the streets.

"Yet selling drugs with no discernable benefits, and high risks such as death, is a flawed solution."

You mean like alcohol?

Yes.

@2: We already use the illegalization of drugs as a way to oppress, so it's not like legalization would make that any worse. And maybe we could then use some of the $$$$$$$$$$ we currently spend on the "drug war" and incarcerating individuals (and when it comes to durg offenses, white people tend to get veritable wrist-slaps for doing exactly the same thing POC are sent up for years over) to treat every addict who wanted to get clean - at a fraction of the cost.

@5:

A dose of Heroin is already cheaper than a pack of cigarettes - if it were legal it would probably be even cheaper, not to mention more readily available, so there'd be very little need for addicts to have to steal in order to procure it. Also, we could probably do a lot better job with quality contron of legal smack, so doses would be more standardized, not to mention not being cut with deadly shit like Fentanyl, so there would be far less risk of OD'ing.

Just as we've witnessed with cannabis legalization, legalization of opioids would basically be a win-win-win for everyone - except for the moral absolutists of course, who believe the only proper "vice" is denigrating, dehumanizing, and oppressing others.

I do not believe that the legalization of hard drugs would be a win win situation. The problem is that while many addicts would like to quit using most don't have the stamina; for a hard core user the craving never really goes away. If you get on that junk you have to keep taking more and more to be able to get high due to your bodies resistance; pretty soon that leads to an overdose. The hard core addict also eventually drops into total vegetative state unable to care for themselves let alone work and be productive. It is wrong to compare cannabis with opioids as they are worlds apart. The same can be said about cocaine; meth shouldn't even be considered at all.

The methadone treatment works fairly well for the opioid addict but again he has to have the real desire to quit. The problem is that the methadone will stabilize you but you won't get high and that is what the user craves. If the user has a life he stands a good chance to recover, but if he is homeless and has no form of ambition his case is likely hopeless.

@6: precisely. A gram of pure heroin can be produced for about a dollar. Not sure what the cost is now, but about 10 years ago you could get a gram of cocaine in Bogota for $1.45. Legalization would completely undercut the illicit market and deprive the cartels of the billions they use to terrorize huge parts of Latin and South America and would dramatically reduce the amount of acquisitive crimes committed by folks trying to get money to support their habits. In cities all across the US virtually everyone arrested for shoplifting, mail theft, car prowls, and the like is known to police as someone supporting a habit.

@8:

If Heroin did indeed "kill(s). Every time" then there'd be no addict problem, because they'd all be dead, yes? But, in point of fact, some addicts can maintain their habit literally for decades.

@10:

Legalization would continue to drive down the price, just as it's done with cannabis. If Heroin was as cheap to purchase as a six-pack of soda or a double-tall soy vanilla mocha, there'd be little need for addicts to resort to petty theft in order to support their habits.

And full national legalization probably would send the cartels packing - at least out of the U.S. - because their revenue stream would essentially dry up overnight, given that most of the supply could very easily be provided by authorized growers and processors.

@11:

I don't assume those wouldn't be considered as part of the legalization process. But, in reality we're talking about a very small percentage of the total population, since it's rather unlikely most people are going to immediately run out and start shooting up or dropping acid or brewing peyote tea, just because they can, which has always been one of the canards put forth by the "Just Say 'No!'" contingent. But yes, there would be something of a trade-off with legalization, in that, decriminalizing drug use would inevitably lead to a decrease in drug-related incarcerations, while, as I said, simultaneously freeing up substantial financial resources to deal with those societal effects: education, treatment, rehabilitation, etc. In short, we would shift from treating drug use as a purely criminal issue to treating it as a public health/medical issue.

Yes, all drugs should be legalized. Regulation is an option but prohibition is immoral.

All people should have the right to bodily autonomy, including what they ingest. Prohibition has caused suffering far more than drugs ever have. The majority of drug deaths have been caused by prohibition due to its impact on drug production, distribution, and consumption.

By the same token, all people must take responsibility for their actions, and that doesn't end when intoxicated. If you get behind the wheel drunk or high, that's on you, not the substance you took. Same with any harmful action.

Yes.

Except for things like PCP.

Drug decriminalization works quite well in Portugal.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radical-drugs-policy-is-working-why-hasnt-the-world-copied-it

@16 PCP too. I would bet good money you've only ever heard of PCP on the news or by rumors, if you're like most people. That means you've only heard negative reports or hype. The news only reports when things go bad in a way they can spin, they never report any time someone has a good drug experience (obviously) or all the times people's nonviolent lives are ruined by prohibition.

Legalization means legalization.