Well this is the biggest moot point I can think of, the war on drugs. I found no thread about this, and said what the hell, I could use a little debate.
Anyways, if you are against it, go here and sign the petition...it isn't a sure fire thing but one can only hope. http://www.avaaz.org/en/end_the_war_on_drugs/
I personally think that this war has been costly and ineffective, plus there are several benefits that could come from legislation...although I wouldn't expect anything from the UAE, since we're basically living in medieval times.
There are a whole bunch of reasons to support this, and I think we can all be a little mature and save the "herp drugz iz bad 4 yur brainz derp"
1)Regulation. Illegal drugs are cut with all kinds of shit. Legalised drugs would be regulated and so wouldn't be full of crap. This makes them much, much safer for use. The impurities in drugs are harmful and cause (extra) damage. Varying levels of concentration are also to blame for lots of OD's.
2)Tax. Speaks for itself. Alcohol and tobacco more than make up in tax revenue what they cost most governments. Something like ?2 billion a year in cost, ?6 billion a year in tax revenue. There is no reason why illegal drugs would be different.
3)Saves money. Like I've said before, the War on Drugs is astronomically expensive and the police can focus time, money and effort on catching real criminals rather than pursuing addicts.
4)There is no reason to believe it will increase the number of users. In the UK when weed was re-classified to C instead of B, the number of users fell from 11% to 8%. In Holland, weed usage fell after its decriminalisation. In Geneva a test program where heroin users were given safe drugs and a place to do it in caused the number of new users to fall by 80%. If you ask someone why they don't do crack it's usually because they don't want to be a crackhead, not because the police might lock them up.
5)Lowers crime. I don't just mean drug possession/dealing. Drug dealing gangs are responsible for huge amounts of crime. Cutting out a major source of their income will cut crime.
6)Drug barons go bust/legit. Drug barons aren't nice people. This would put the money into the hands of CEO's instead. Not a huge improvement I must say but most CEO's aren't quite as bad as drug barons. Either that or drug barons will go legit. Not an ideal solution but still cuts crime.
7)Free up prison space. The UAE prison system is dangerously overcrowded and the less said about the size of the US prison system the better. Suffice to say that there will be far more room in prisons when we stop locking people up for having an addiction.
Hypocrisy. There is no reason why tobacco and alcohol should be legal and acceptable and other drugs shouldn't be. Far more people are killed by those two. Far more violence is caused by alcohol. Etc etc. It doesn't make sense and tradition is not a reason for anything.9)Cheaper. If drugs are legal then they'd be cheaper (even when taxed). This would mean that drug addicts wouldn't have to steal (or would have to steal less) to obtain drugs. Lots of crime is caused by this and getting rid of it sounds good.
10)People will be less afraid of getting help for their addictions and will make it easier for people to get into rehab or whatever. As it stands, it's kind of awkward given the illegal status of drugs. It's easier to quit tobacco and alcohol because you can get lots of help from pharmacies and lots of other charities. Illegal drugs don't have this. Think about it, if tobacco had been illegal for the past 50 or so years, would it be socially acceptable to become an addict?
11)Freedom. Even without the other 10 reasons (which IMO are more than enough to warrant legalisation) I would still advocate legalisation for the very simple reason that it is the not the government's place to tell me what I can do to myself for my own enjoyment. I can slice a razorblade across my arm, why I can't I stick a syringe full of heroin in? (not that I actually want to) It seems ridiculous that there are actually chemicals which are banned. A somewhat backwards view for the 21st century.
So what does everyone else here think? I'm interested in seeing to which side user consensus is gonna be, it's an interesting topic of debate.
Go.
