Legalize heroin

[Typist]

Psychological effects are far more recoverable than physiological effects.

Hmm... This seems an ambitious assertion. You can kick heroin by spending a week in physical torment. It's the psychology that leads you to discard that accomplishment and start using again.

[James S Saint]

Misinformation (psychology) can lead you into trouble.
But the trouble is the trouble.

Yes, you can somewhat recover from heroin use in a matter of weeks.
You can recover from misinformation in a matter of minutes.
..depending on what kind of misinformation it is.

The problem with drugs is that they relay misinformation to the brain on a physiological level.
They tell the brain that there really is hope in taking the drug.
Once that information is within the system, stopping the drug use is a problem, but doable.
But getting rid of the information that the drug embedded into the system is extremely difficult.
..often taking an entire life time, and usually not ever accomplished.

The physiologically embedded psychology and ill health is the vampire.

[Only_Humean]

http://thecount.com/2012/05/30/florida-zombie-victim-pictured/ Drug-crazed attack in Miami

What do you guys think of this news article? Use sensibly huh? a notion that is putting far too much faith in humans

Same goes for alcohol, Mags. Kitchen knives. Cars. Over a million people die in traffic accidents every year, we don't ban cars. We regulate them.

[MagsJ]

Sorry OH, but those are not the same thing at all - the drug that the attacker was on carries a severe sentence for those dealing it and people are being encouraged to report any supplies of the drug floating around... there is a zero-tolerance policy applied to it.

Humans have not got the will-power to use responsibly!

[lizbethrose]

To me, one of the more pressing reasons for maintaining the ban on drugs is public safety. A secondary reason is the cost to the public for the medical treatment of over-dose victims. This sounds cruel, I know, but how many overdose victims (uninsured) are treated in emergency rooms every year?

New drugs appear on the 'market' all the time. As of 2011, the ingredients in "bath salts" hadn't been completely analyzed, although it's known to have a combination of 'uppers.' Is Western society so mired in an 'entertainment' groove that it has to seek out drugs for entertainment?

[James S Saint]

Same goes for alcohol, Mags. Kitchen knives. Cars. Over a million people die in traffic accidents every year, we don't ban cars. We regulate them.

Those things do not directly affect one's ability to make decisions, to think.

[Typist]

Over a million people die in traffic accidents every year, we don't ban cars. We regulate them.

Worldwide?

Here's some info about the U.S.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mo ... S._by_year

This is a list of motor vehicle deaths in the United States by year. On average in 2009, 93 people were killed on the roadways of the U.S. each day.

The number of deaths – and deaths relative to the total population – have declined over the last two decades. From 1979 to 2005, the number of deaths per year decreased 14.97% while the number of deaths per capita decreased by 35.46%.

Traffic fatalities in 2010 were the lowest in 62 years.

[Typist]

Same goes for alcohol, Mags. Kitchen knives. Cars. Over a million people die in traffic accidents every year, we don't ban cars. We regulate them.

Those things do not directly affect one's ability to make decisions, to think.

Alcohol doesn't impair thinking?? I think you've been drinking.

[MagsJ]

Alcohol doesn't impair thinking?? I think you've been drinking.

I thought alcohol impaired reaction times, but not actual thinking.. just the time it takes to ation a thought/decision...

[Typist]

Aha, he's been drinking with Magsj, and now they're both sauced. Pass the bottle over here before I call you stingy!

[MagsJ]

To me, one of the more pressing reasons for maintaining the ban on drugs is public safety. A secondary reason is the cost to the public for the medical treatment of over-dose victims. This sounds cruel, I know, but how many overdose victims (uninsured) are treated in emergency rooms every year?

They are my main reasons too Liz - public safety, and the cost of the aftermath: my doctor told me that my health worries were minor as he was busy keeping his drug-addicted patients supplied with their meth... I have since changed doctors and am now getting the care I need rather than being pushed aside for the humans who still carry a security blanket around, because that's what grown-ups crying out that drugs should be legalised sound like they are doing

[MagsJ]

Aha, he's been drinking with Magsj, and now they're both sauced. Pass the bottle over here before I call you stingy!

No drink for me until my home-made vin rouge is ready in a week or so... celiac's doesn't allow me to have normal indulgences like other folk but feel free to drink a bit of whatever takes your fancy

[James S Saint]

Same goes for alcohol, Mags. Kitchen knives. Cars. Over a million people die in traffic accidents every year, we don't ban cars. We regulate them.

Those things do not directly affect one's ability to make decisions, to think.

Alcohol doesn't impair thinking?? I think you've been drinking.

Oops.. didn't mean THAT one.

[MagsJ]

Bump

[MagsJ]

Legalise safety blankets for adults... why?

[Only_Humean]

Legalise safety blankets for adults... why?

You're surely the one arguing for the law to be used as a safety blanket, no? You appear to be arguing that making something illegal stops it happening. I'm not crying out for it to be legalised as a "safety blanket". I wouldn't use heroin if it were a legal controlled substance, and neither would you. The only people I know personally who would, are the people who are doing it anyway. And equal2u

And if you think alcohol only impairs reaction times and not thought processes, I take it you've never wandered around town at 11pm. It's a disinhibitor, and as such strongly associated with violence and promiscuity. You really don't know of any link at all between alcohol and violence?

But in any case, if you'd like to discuss further it would be more productive to address the arguments as they stand than decide that they are motivated by childish insecurities.

[Typist]

I wouldn't use heroin if it were a legal controlled substance, and neither would you.

All drugs could be legal for anyone over say, age 75 or 80.

Something to look forward to!

[equal2u]

Yes, that's correct. I'm a human being and I want to feel good. Am I supposed to be ashamed about that?

No, of course not. But neither should the rest of society feel ashamed because it chooses not to re-structure public policy around your personal preferences.

I'm not demanding public policy is re-structured around my personal preferences. I'm demanding that public policy is re-structured around human rights. I'm just one human amongst 7 billion.

Given the huge profits to be made in both legal and illegal drugs it's a given that drugs will become ever more powerful. The old adages about self responsibility and will power etc will become increasingly irrelevant, as I'm sure it's possible to create drugs that will sweep all of that aside.

I'm sure it isn't. Nothing can sweep aside responsibility.

This is the reality public policy makers have to face. Many drugs are already stronger than many people, and that's only going to accelerate as we go forward. A public policy of "everything should be legal" is hopelessly naive. How will you get your legal heroin once the society around you has collapsed?

Drugs are inert substances, they can't be stronger than people.

I had a friend in high school. He was quite intelligent, very wealthy, and the coolest kid in school. He had everything. He was our LSD king, and went on to qualudes and who knows what else. Over 40 years later he's still struggling to rescue his life from drugs.

I question your assessment of your friend's intelligence.

Point being, we have no way of knowing who can safely use drugs, and who won't make it out the other side. Nobody knows this, it's a total random crap shoot.

Everybody is entitled to roll the dice with their own life, but those who make public policy are wise to not hand out free dice to everybody.

Taking drugs is nothing like a random crap shoot or rolling dice. It's about responsibility. If you use drugs responsibly the risks are very low. If you use them irresponsibly the risks are very high. The more irresponsible you are in your use of drugs the greater the risks are, it's as simple as that.

The price tag for your perfect freedom would be very many ruined lives.

I think legalising and regulating the drugs would mean far less ruined lives in society.

[Slow John]

I think it should be decriminalized and made available the same way alcohol and tobacco are – for consenting adults. laws for use in vehicles and out in the open should be enforced. Laws for soliciting to minors should be enforced strictly. Education should be handled by smart people who aren't delusional and condescending. We should also keep trying to improve the repressed, oppressed and stupid way most of us live so that we don't need to turn to drugs as urgently. But making it illegal changes nothing, just makes OD and bad product and criminals and drug lords. It creates lies and distance.

I have done heroin. It's awesome, and not nearly as scary as people think. It's a 3-4 hour high and while on it I was fully functional and very happy. The problem is that I could wake up the next day and think, "wow, it's absurd not to do it again," and I can see it becoming a habit very fast. That's when I decided to try something else less addictive, like jogging. I would like to have a bottle of vikes in my med cabinet at all times for special occasions. and a tincture of h powder for a snort once in a while. Make it all legal. End the criminals overnight and put the choice in the hands of the people. Educate drug users so they know how to stay out of trouble, just like you educate alcohol or OTC drug users. If you want to ban something, stop marketing HFCS products to minors on TV. Everyone's fucking fat, and the kids are innocent.

[equal2u]

I think it should be decriminalized and made available the same way alcohol and tobacco are – for consenting adults.

It couldn't be made available the same way alcohol and tobacco are if it was only decriminalized, for that it would have to be legalised. I am against decriminalization and in favour of legalisation and regulation. Decriminalization and legalisation are different things. Decriminalization is not just a fancy way of saying legalisation. Regulation is impossible with decriminalisation.

laws for use in vehicles and out in the open should be enforced. Laws for soliciting to minors should be enforced strictly. Education should be handled by smart people who aren't delusional and condescending. We should also keep trying to improve the repressed, oppressed and stupid way most of us live so that we don't need to turn to drugs as urgently. But making it illegal changes nothing, just makes OD and bad product and criminals and drug lords. It creates lies and distance.

I have done heroin. It's awesome, and not nearly as scary as people think. It's a 3-4 hour high and while on it I was fully functional and very happy. The problem is that I could wake up the next day and think, "wow, it's absurd not to do it again," and I can see it becoming a habit very fast. That's when I decided to try something else less addictive, like jogging. I would like to have a bottle of vikes in my med cabinet at all times for special occasions. and a tincture of h powder for a snort once in a while. Make it all legal. End the criminals overnight and put the choice in the hands of the people. Educate drug users so they know how to stay out of trouble, just like you educate alcohol or OTC drug users. If you want to ban something, stop marketing HFCS products to minors on TV. Everyone's fucking fat, and the kids are innocent.

Thanks, John.

[Slow John]

I knew it as I typed it that I was issuing a lazy misnomer, but i meant, start by decriminalizing it at the very least, like we have done for marijuana in some states in the USA. Then, after that becomes commonplace, consider the bogus storefront prescription paradigm that we see in california right now for weed. Then, when that settles in, switch to making it legal like alcohol and tylenol, et al.

what this would do to drug crime and big pharma is not my primary concern. it's that arresting someone for buying some H and snorting it is ludicrous.

when I did heroin, I was cautious as hell, went slow and in moderation, snorting a teensy tiny tiniest bit, and cycled up from there until i got the desired effect. having it illegal and unlabeled/regulated is only going to allow people to fuck up the USAGE INSTRUCTIONS, since there are none.

the supplement industry is a great example. if I buy a tub of workout powder from a huge brand like BSN or Gaspari that contains a huge amount of geranium extract, i at least know that a company has taken at least some care to parse out the right amy in each serving so that they don't get sued and go out of business. i also know to take 2 scoops at the maximum and not mix with caffeine, or take before bed, or take 8 scoops, and so forth.

If heroin came with these warnings, and people had access to adrenalin like they did epi-pens, fine. Life goes on.

people buy lottery tix and cigarettes, jerk off to porn, they eat cinnabuns and watch the kardashians...let them take heroin, too. it's stupid, it's damaging, it's fun.

just so you know though, if you intend to take heroin every day and you want to live along productive life as well, find a doctor who is willing to advise you. it may be difficult because most will not want to endorse any use of heroin for recreational purposes. but just like athletes find doctors to advise on illegal steroid use, you could find a doctor to keep you out of trouble with heroin, as long as you know the risks, which are very high if you're getting street product and shooting up. finding a doctor who would rather see you stoned than dead is hard but not impossible. legalize it and the floodgates of advice and consistent product open up, and for many it well spell the end of despair. the thing about heroin is that it works. medically administered heroin for long term use has never been fully examined. i don't claim to know the techniques for making it sustainable, but i'm assuming if you mix it with serotonin precursors and counter measures and some other things you could limit the dopamine activity.

there may be ways to slow the tolerance, or cycle on and off, again, like we are instructed to do with creatine, melatonin, and a number of other legal drugs. they should get busy on a way to make heroin sustainable like prozac, a way to make the effect continue to work for years instead of burning out the dopamine receptors or mu opioid agonists until they need more and more for the same effect. is anyone working on this? some feeble minded professional will attempt to explain why this is impossible and I say bullshit. biotech is moving forward. what's possible changes every day. and i'm unconvinced that certain measures and usage techniques don't already exist, since I've exercised them myself for a prolonged period of time.

if you've ever watch a loved one, like a teen, get sucked into the grips of drug use, with no escape, all identity lost, then you might balk at making it legal, but that's not a rational reaction. the problem was the kid, not the drug; the kid played with fire. blame the fuckers who didn't slap on a warning label. i don't see anyone making fire illegal. a stove comes with a 200 page safety manual.

[obe]

I knew it as I typed it that I was issuing a lazy misnomer, but i meant, start by decriminalizing it at the very least, like we have done for marijuana in some states in the USA. Then, after that becomes commonplace, consider the bogus storefront prescription paradigm that we see in california right now for weed. Then, when that settles in, switch to making it legal like alcohol and tylenol, et al.

what this would do to drug crime and big pharma is not my primary concern. it's that arresting someone for buying some H and snorting it is ludicrous.

when I did heroin, I was cautious as hell, went slow and in moderation, snorting a teensy tiny tiniest bit, and cycled up from there until i got the desired effect. having it illegal and unlabeled/regulated is only going to allow people to fuck up the USAGE INSTRUCTIONS, since there are none.

the supplement industry is a great example. if I buy a tub of workout powder from a huge brand like BSN or Gaspari that contains a huge amount of geranium extract, i at least know that a company has taken at least some care to parse out the right amy in each serving so that they don't get sued and go out of business. i also know to take 2 scoops at the maximum and not mix with caffeine, or take before bed, or take 8 scoops, and so forth.

If heroin came with these warnings, and people had access to adrenalin like they did epi-pens, fine. Life goes on.

people buy lottery tix and cigarettes, jerk off to porn, they eat cinnabuns and watch the kardashians...let them take heroin, too. it's stupid, it's damaging, it's fun.

just so you know though, if you intend to take heroin every day and you want to live along productive life as well, find a doctor who is willing to advise you. it may be difficult because most will not want to endorse any use of heroin for recreational purposes. but just like athletes find doctors to advise on illegal steroid use, you could find a doctor to keep you out of trouble with heroin, as long as you know the risks, which are very high if you're getting street product and shooting up. finding a doctor who would rather see you stoned than dead is hard but not impossible. legalize it and the floodgates of advice and consistent product open up, and for many it well spell the end of despair. the thing about heroin is that it works. medically administered heroin for long term use has never been fully examined. i don't claim to know the techniques for making it sustainable, but i'm assuming if you mix it with serotonin precursors and counter measures and some other things you could limit the dopamine activity.

there may be ways to slow the tolerance, or cycle on and off, again, like we are instructed to do with creatine, melatonin, and a number of other legal drugs. they should get busy on a way to make heroin sustainable like prozac, a way to make the effect continue to work for years instead of burning out the dopamine receptors or mu opioid agonists until they need more and more for the same effect. is anyone working on this? some feeble minded professional will attempt to explain why this is impossible and I say bullshit. biotech is moving forward. what's possible changes every day. and i'm unconvinced that certain measures and usage techniques don't already exist, since I've exercised them myself for a prolonged period of time.

if you've ever watch a loved one, like a teen, get sucked into the grips of drug use, with no escape, all identity lost, then you might balk at making it legal, but that's not a rational reaction. the problem was the kid, not the drug; the kid played with fire. blame the fuckers who didn't slap on a warning label. i don't see anyone making fire illegal. a stove comes with a 200 page safety manual.

The problem with this argument is that levels of comprehension need to be factored in when you talk about responsibility in self administration. Some kids don't have this, or they don't care. They'll do it because their friends do it. So if they get hooked, and you can't argue that because of age restrictions they will be denied access like alcohol, cause they will jiust have somebody buying for them. And as kids, they may not be the lucky ones to get hold of a doctor who will monitor them. Your argument speaks well for well adjusted working adults, but for others, it may be an irresistible risk they may not be able to afford to take?

[equal2u]

I knew it as I typed it that I was issuing a lazy misnomer, but i meant, start by decriminalizing it at the very least, like we have done for marijuana in some states in the USA. Then, after that becomes commonplace, consider the bogus storefront prescription paradigm that we see in california right now for weed. Then, when that settles in, switch to making it legal like alcohol and tylenol, et al.

what this would do to drug crime and big pharma is not my primary concern. it's that arresting someone for buying some H and snorting it is ludicrous.

when I did heroin, I was cautious as hell, went slow and in moderation, snorting a teensy tiny tiniest bit, and cycled up from there until i got the desired effect. having it illegal and unlabeled/regulated is only going to allow people to fuck up the USAGE INSTRUCTIONS, since there are none.

the supplement industry is a great example. if I buy a tub of workout powder from a huge brand like BSN or Gaspari that contains a huge amount of geranium extract, i at least know that a company has taken at least some care to parse out the right amy in each serving so that they don't get sued and go out of business. i also know to take 2 scoops at the maximum and not mix with caffeine, or take before bed, or take 8 scoops, and so forth.

If heroin came with these warnings, and people had access to adrenalin like they did epi-pens, fine. Life goes on.

people buy lottery tix and cigarettes, jerk off to porn, they eat cinnabuns and watch the kardashians...let them take heroin, too. it's stupid, it's damaging, it's fun.

Using heroin responsibly isn't stupid or damaging.

just so you know though, if you intend to take heroin every day and you want to live along productive life as well, find a doctor who is willing to advise you. it may be difficult because most will not want to endorse any use of heroin for recreational purposes. but just like athletes find doctors to advise on illegal steroid use, you could find a doctor to keep you out of trouble with heroin, as long as you know the risks, which are very high if you're getting street product and shooting up. finding a doctor who would rather see you stoned than dead is hard but not impossible. legalize it and the floodgates of advice and consistent product open up, and for many it well spell the end of despair. the thing about heroin is that it works. medically administered heroin for long term use has never been fully examined. i don't claim to know the techniques for making it sustainable, but i'm assuming if you mix it with serotonin precursors and counter measures and some other things you could limit the dopamine activity.

there may be ways to slow the tolerance, or cycle on and off, again, like we are instructed to do with creatine, melatonin, and a number of other legal drugs. they should get busy on a way to make heroin sustainable like prozac, a way to make the effect continue to work for years instead of burning out the dopamine receptors or mu opioid agonists until they need more and more for the same effect. is anyone working on this? some feeble minded professional will attempt to explain why this is impossible and I say bullshit. biotech is moving forward. what's possible changes every day. and i'm unconvinced that certain measures and usage techniques don't already exist, since I've exercised them myself for a prolonged period of time.

Meth permanently destroys pleasure receptors in the brain during long term frequent use. This doesn't happen with heroin. You build up tolerance but that will go away after use is discontinued.

if you've ever watch a loved one, like a teen, get sucked into the grips of drug use, with no escape, all identity lost, then you might balk at making it legal, but that's not a rational reaction. the problem was the kid, not the drug; the kid played with fire. blame the fuckers who didn't slap on a warning label. i don't see anyone making fire illegal. a stove comes with a 200 page safety manual.

I'm arguing that drugs are legalised for adults only, not kids.

[equal2u]

The problem with this argument is that levels of comprehension need to be factored in when you talk about responsibility in self administration. Some kids don't have this, or they don't care. They'll do it because their friends do it. So if they get hooked, and you can't argue that because of age restrictions they will be denied access like alcohol, cause they will jiust have somebody buying for them. And as kids, they may not be the lucky ones to get hold of a doctor who will monitor them. Your argument speaks well for well adjusted working adults, but for others, it may be an irresistible risk they may not be able to afford to take?

Right now the cops are presented with an impossible and ridiculous task, stopping all illegal drug use. Stopping kids taking drugs is a sensible and achievable aim. In my system adults would be required to secure their drugs. Allowing a child to get hold of drugs intentionally or through negligence would be a criminal offense.

[von Rivers]

My claim is that heroin should continue to remain illegal.

Here’s the few considerations that I’ve found levied in favour of the opposite position:
1. You want to take heroin.
2. Legalizing heroin opens it up to regulation and safer use.
3. Legalizing heroin would deflate the power of drug gangs.

The broader topic is about the reason why anything should be illegal, in the first place. Perhaps someone will want to argue that nothing should ever be illegal, and if so, then I’ll have to scrap my argument---but for now, let’s assume that there is some reason why laws exist. So, what’s that reason?

Let’s take a principle that I think both sides can agree upon, (unless the other side consists of lawless anarchists). It’s something like J.S. Mill’s principle in On Liberty: (1) No substance or act should be illegal just because it harms the individual, but (2) if some act or substance causes harm to other people, then society can rightly exercise control over that individual—to prevent harm to others—and one means of doing that is the law and the corresponding penalties of breaking it. This is the Harm Principle.

Or we could just do it straight up Utilitarian style. (A law is justified when it maximizes pleasure or minimizes pain). But these first principles won’t always yield the same deductions. And the consensus in the opposite camp seems to be the former principle, since I’m not aware of someone arguing that even a single bout of heroin, withdrawal included, is on balance good, though there’s a few hours of good feeling. My experience is that high highs are accompanied by low lows. Physiologically, maybe the science bears that out, maybe not.

In any case, I’m happy to commit my conclusions to either first principle. It’s just hard to do a utilitarian style cost-benefit analysis—since none of you give any facts, just anecdotes, and nor do I plan to initiate that. Without any facts, let’s cast some doubt on the reasoning of your points taken together. So, there's not so much going to be a positive case, on my side, as much as I want to point out the poverty of what has been said on the other side. First, point 2…

Legalizing heroin means you can control and regulate it. This point is nice because it doesn’t seem to assume that doing heroin is a good thing at all, (though it wouldn’t take much for me to push your back against that wall). This could just be a case of minimizing a bad thing. Suppose you could only get heroin by prescription from a doctor, (as if there was a disease for which it was the cure). Then people will still go to drug dealers to get heroin. Suppose what you really want are safety labels on heroin containers—odd, but you can already find proper use instructions. Google it. Suppose you want to know exactly what’s in what you’re getting, so that you’re not snorting up crushed Tylenol and whatever chemicals it has been cut with. If you don’t like the quality of what your dealer is selling, or if he doesn’t have the transparency in his business practices that you want, as a customer, then don’t buy the product…

Your response here will either assume that you want to buy the product (point 1). Or else you’re concerned about others who are buying the product (this is point 3). Fine, but recognize that point 2 is a subsidiary one that will fall back on either point 3 or point 1—it doesn’t and can’t stand on its own.

Take point 1. You want to buy safe, clean heroin. You would have to make the case either that doing so doesn’t harm other people, or that the harm is outweighed by the greater good, depending on which first principle you go in for. Either case is going to be tough to make when you do a study of any sample of people who do heroin. And I’m not aware of anybody having made either case in this thread. The most that has been said is that someone did it once and it was stupid, destructive, and fun. Congrats.

Why don’t we just ban cigarettes then? They cost a ton of health care tax dollars and yada yada. A few possible responses are available to me. Perhaps we should ban cigarettes, or perhaps cigarette users die at a younger age which ultimately saves the health care costs associated with a longer and slower death, and this balances out the costs of tobacco related illness. I choose neither of those responses. My response is that you are making the perfect the enemy of the good. For example, I should workout and eat healthy. I cannot eat healthy, therefore I should not workout. Is that your reasoning?

Maybe you want to say that your point is not so much that you want to buy heroin, as that you are concerned about the state of people who do buy heroin. Points 1 and 3 really fit oddly together, since when they are put together you would seem to be concerned about users, and also desirous of becoming a user. So, let’s pull the points apart, and just focus on 3.

Drug gangs are a problem for a host of reasons, not the least of which is the lack of transparency in their business practices. Two options: have government sell their product for them, or jail and kill them. If you want government to sell their product for them, then you have to argue either that heroin use doesn’t harm others, or that it’s for the greater good. Nobody has argued for the former, and we’ve seen what happens to the latter (point 2). And since we’ve separated points 1 and 3, we can add to the case the consideration that jailing drug dealers, and reducing the possibility of doing heroin in the first place, may be more effective than making a bad product freely available.

These reflections aren’t a positive case for the status quo, but I think they go toward showing the so far poor case made on behalf of the opposite position. Maybe what remains now is to do a study of how heroin affects you, and we can look at some data on how heroin affects people who use heroin. I'm not sure how it will turn out, but it doesn't look good for you, even if you personally are capable of cutting off your dick and thinking it worked out for the better.