Does drug decriminalization work?

[duece212 5,000+ posts]

but see the point is, I understand these repercussions, and even being a user of weed, I understand it is still not accepted by society. Ive been clean for the last 2 weeks because I still maintained my understanding that I may have to drop to be employed this summer. Nothing has changed for me other than not smoking solely so i piss clean, I still hold the belief that i will smoke weed the rest of my life. I just dont understand how God gave me the right to freedom of choice yet the government believes they hold themselves higher than god and think that they can truly stop me from smoking. its just ignorant on their part.

Welcome to the real world, it sucks doesn't it

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

The societies of 80 years ago and today are worlds apart

Absolutely correct, and what has prohibition done to change that? Nothing.

You are correct drug use is not dangerous to others, especially immediate families of drug users. If you honestly think personal drug use ends at the person you have the blinders on man.

Drug use is not dangerous to others. Drug abuse is, and legalization would focus on addiction treatment and not incarceration.

You don't think employment enforcement of drug use policies which could impact your livelihood is not valid "enforcement" to be concerned about. The relationship between employer and employee is in no way an obstacle to legalization may be true, but it is still an obstacle to the employee. If you choose to disregard that to move on with the discussion feel free.

The conversation is about legalization. This is world's apart from a discussion of the efficacy of drug policy.

 

[AllDayMJ 10+ year member]

Welcome to the real world, it sucks doesn't it

ignorance is bliss, is it not?

 

[hornedfrog1985 5,000+ posts]

Cocaine used to be legal. That's da good stuff. We could all be railed for 16 hours a day, and just work for cocaine.

 

[duece212 5,000+ posts]

Absolutely correct, and what has prohibition done to change that? Nothing.

How do we know that things wouldn't be worse in the US in these days and times without prohibition? We don't unless we repeal it. Maybe we repeal it for a few years, see what goes to shit and what doesn't, and then reassess when we have some valid data...

Drug use is not dangerous to others. Drug abuse is, and legalization would focus on addiction treatment and not incarceration.

Why not just focus more on treatment than incarceration with drugs still being illegal?

The conversation is about legalization. This is world's apart from a discussion of the efficacy of drug policy.

I still don't see how you find the real impact of legislation on the country not important to the discussion, but so be it. As said above, ignorance is bliss.

....and I'm tired of doing the 3 quote thing, I'm too lazy to add 3 quote tags //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

How do we know that things wouldn't be worse in the US in these days and times without prohibition? We don't unless we repeal it. Maybe we repeal it for a few years, see what goes to shit and what doesn't, and then reassess when we have some valid data...

Exactly, we don't know, and for us to continue to try the failed war without trying is a mistake.

Why not just focus more on treatment than incarceration with drugs still being illegal?

Because the illegality does nothing, is inconsistent, and immoral. Not to mention expensive.

I still don't see how you find the real impact of legislation on the country not important to the discussion, but so be it. As said above, ignorance is bliss

We're talking about how effective the drug policies are for managing the drug problem. How any employer handles off-work drug use is a very different discussion that would likely be left to the private sector anyways.

 

[snoopdan 5,000+ posts]

Cocaine used to be legal. That's da good stuff. We could all be railed for 16 hours a day, and just work for cocaine.

 

[AllDayMJ 10+ year member]

Why not just focus more on treatment than incarceration with drugs still being illegal?

I'm all for decriminalization. I just dont see the US legailizing it until it can be properly taxed and tested for, I personally know people who simply cannot function and properly operate vehicles when high, and that's why i don't believe we can allow it to be legal unless we can validly test for it on sight as with a breathalyzer.

I just researched and found that i could have been imprisoned for 10years minimum mandatory sentenced for what i did. That's absurd, leave jail for the real criminals.

 

[duece212 5,000+ posts]

Exactly, we don't know, and for us to continue to try the failed war without trying is a mistake.



Because the illegality does nothing, is inconsistent, and immoral.

We're talking about how effective the drug policies are for managing the drug problem. How any employer handles off-work drug use is a very different discussion that would likely be left to the private sector anyways.

Exactly, we don't know, so how do we know the wars level of success/failure //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif I'm a realist though, lets open this bitch up, serve up some legal drugs, get some real data, and then move forward with longterm decisions.

Ok, lets source out those inconsistencies and make them consistent.

We are the private sector, just making sure druggies think about everything that impacts them, not just the gov

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

I'm all for decriminalization. I just dont see the US legailizing it until it can be properly taxed and tested for, I personally know people who simply cannot function and properly operate vehicles when high, and that's why i don't believe we can allow it to be legal unless we can validly test for it on sight as with a breathalyzer.
I just researched and found that i could have been imprisoned for 10years minimum mandatory sentenced for what i did. That's absurd, leave jail for the real criminals.

You don't think we require that testing now?

What does the legality have to do with the necessity for testing?

 

[mcsoul 10+ year member]

Like I said before, legalize drugs and open same day walk-in assisted ******* clinics.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

Exactly, we don't know, so how do we know the wars level of success/failure //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif I'm a realist though, lets open this bitch up, serve up some legal drugs, get some real data, and then move forward with longterm decisions.

The War on Drugs was intended to make the world drug free (well, free of the drugs they decided are illicit). This was specifically stated. They've now moved to "minimizing" the availability of drugs. Since the drug war has had no impact statistically, but has cost billions of dollars, I would classify that as a failure.

 

[AllDayMJ 10+ year member]

You don't think we require that testing now?
What does the legality have to do with the necessity for testing?

we do, I said VALID testing, all we have available to test with is an on site bloodtest, which can detect THC in your bloodstream from the last 5-7 days.

In order for us to legalize it, we must be able to test for people being intoxicated while operating motor vehicles(DUI), much to the likes of drunk driving.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

Again, I don't understand what legalization has to do with that. The testing is just as required now as it would be then.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

That is exactly it, it must meet certain safety criteria, or risk analysis, which I don't believe is met in legalizing all drugs.
Does the employer's tests have the ability to prove you were high on Friday and not today? Also many employers have zero tolerance policies, some now even for smoking tobacco. Do you think they would care if you told them you got high on Friday, not today?

Your 'risk analysis' is that DUI's kill people every year. Is there a reason you chose to ignore my point that we as a society place different 'risk criteria' on different mind altering substances just because of social pressure? Alcohol is by far a more debilitating drug, during use and in terms of prolonged effects, yet its use and possesion is legal, so long as your possesion and use fullfill certain laws... must be 21, must not operate a vehicle, etc. When I bring this point to your attention, your response is that legalizing all drugs does not meet your requirement for safety standards. Im not necessarily for legalizing all drugs, but your arbitrary line in the sand seems to have no basis beyond your own personal defition of what is safe.
No, the test has no way to prove you are high on the job. That's my point. Unless you create an unsafe situation in which drug use is suspected, why should the employer care if you smoke pot on your own time? Its paranoia, Im surprised you are falling for it.

I know of no law that allows an employer to screen possible employees based on their smoking status. And even if there were, does that mean you would agree with it, just because the law existed?