History and Debate of Drug Legalization

By Jesus Weaver

A major drug legalization disadvantage is that it may increase the number of people using drugs in a certain country, especially young people.

"The conclusion is that regulating the drugs market is a dramatically more cost-effective policy than prohibition and that moving from prohibition to regulated drugs markets in England and Wales would provide a net saving to taxpayers, victims of crime, communities, the criminal justice system and drug users of somewhere within the range of, for the four scenarios, £13.9bn, £10.8bn, £7.7bn, £4.6bn".

Here are some proposals for the legalization of drugs. According to him the war on drugs is immoral and impractical.
The points of discord between Husak's and de Marneffe's positions are serious but not as telling as is their implicit agreement.
Washington and Colorado have both legalised recreational use of marijuana and Switzerland has adopted a harm reduction approach in dealing with problem drug users, introducing supervised injection rooms and needle exchange programmes.

If legalization took place, laws similar to the ones restricting teens from acquiring alcohol and tobacco products would be set; but even with laws like these, teens would find a way to obtain the drugs they wanted. In 199? HEMP Help End Marijuana Prohibition was established and continued the fight for law reform. Most drug users are not daily users and use drugs which are less intoxicating than alcohol.

Hard drugs such as heroin and cocaine are typically left alone. These "mushrooms" are also entirely innocent, and lose their lives not because of drugs in and of themselves, but rather due to the law. We learned what many parts of the world already know, that the legalisation of drugs would not increase the drug problem in our country and could have potentially very beneficial results for the state.
Punishing persons by incarceration demands justification.

There used to be a time when the US took pride in being a haven of freedom for the oppressed of the old world.
I don’t believe that we should be legalising any drugs that are currently criminal, but I do believe that drugs policy has been a failure over recent years. One is a criminal if they possess drugs, so they will not do this openly, yet they can do this somewhat openly among the drug-using subculture, and possessing drugs in that subculture makes you high status in that subculture. If drugs were made legal, then the gangs wouldn’t have to hide when selling drugs and could sell even more drugs. And, it is this lack of information that leaves the legalization debate in a constant state of suspension with no possible motion in either direction.

People arrested for drug use or possession should be referred for counselling or treatment instead of incarceration. Increased violent crime and increased numbers of criminals will result in even larger prison populations.
Drug users face inflated prices, health risks, and the threat of jail. Husak finds punishing adolescent users a peculiar way to protect them. "I don't buy into the idea that it will cause a meltdown in society, and that it would open the floodgates and everyone would start going and taking lots of drugs".

However, any shipment or dealer that is caught, has only one effect: a temporary increase in the price of drugs at the location to which they were intended.
Wilton Alston points out that there is another reason for maintaining the "War on Drugs" despite its failings: profit.
Secondly, systematic crime associated with drug trade will decrease. This would be helpful to society because drug addicts would not have to worry about having impurities... Drug use violates no rights.

Lie: Australia and New Zealand have decriminalized the use of drugs. Another argument for the legalization of drugs is that criminal sentences surrounding drugs are a new form of racial discrimination, where certain groups are targeted and suffer to a greater extent than others.
What history fails in providing many instances of is which habits prevail when narcotics are decriminalised.
Fox's post over the weekend is not the first time he's publicly supported legalization of drugs in Mexico.

On July 1, 2001, a nationwide law in Portugal took effect that decriminalized all drugs, including cocaine and heroin. Are they about state control or personal choice?
Drug decriminalization calls for reduced control and penalties compared to existing laws.
Who will determine which segments of the population will have access to legalized drugs? It will be much easier to take these substances to the market under the legalization act as opposed to government regulated outlets.

Heroin, he contends, is highly pleasurable but sharply depresses motivation to achieve worthwhile goals and meet responsibilities. So, what is there to fear about legalising drugs full time?
Pérez Molina’s view is that "to suggest liberalisation - allowing consumption, production and trafficking of drugs without any restriction whatsoever - would be, in my opinion, profoundly irresponsible".
De Marneffe's "burdens principle" seems to hold the whole society hostage to the objective liberty interests of one individual. Who will they turn to for help?

1960s also ushered into the world the widespread use of illegal drugs by teenagers and young adults. If drugs were legal this would not be a problem because everyone would have them and they would be cheap.
There are numerous arguments for drug legalization.