Penn & Teller: The War on Drugs

[dt3]

Nope I do not believe that for one second.

I'm on the fence, but inclined to agree with you. I was just hoping by asking, Ed would see where the fundamental disconnect is here

 

[edgray]

It wasn't an insult. If it was I would make it abundantly clear and I wouldn't be nice about it either.

Now I really want to throw an insult at you because you still haven't gotten the message that I don't want to prohibit anyone the right to use drugs. I will refrain from doing so because I'm a nice guy on Fridays. To that end you and I are finished in this thread because I don't appreciate anyone putting words in my mouth or twisting things when I've made it very clear where I stand.

So you agree with legalisation then?

By the way, I haven't put any words in your mouth.

 

[edgray]

Nope I do not believe that for one second.

legalisation would:

a) take away the money and power from drug dealers and gangs and all the crime they bring with it.
b) it would make drugs considerably cheaper so that crime would be unnecessary even for those addicted.
c) it would remove social taboos from addiction allowing for more truthful education about drugs and their dangers.
d) would bring in money from tax raised to help addicts get over their addictions.

I honestly cannot spell it out any clearer than that.

So, please can you go through those points and then think about your statement and explain why drug related crime would still exist. Thanks.

 

[Guyzerr]

I'm on the fence, but inclined to agree with you. I was just hoping by asking, Ed would see where the fundamental disconnect is here

I don't believe legalizing drugs would remove the criminal element. One of the reasons for my stance is because....

medical MJ has been legal in Canada for quite a few years. The contracts and permits to grow it are awarded by the federal gov't. They also set the standards for it's potency which is too low according to those that have prescriptions. Because of that many of the patients have resorted to buying their smoke from street level dealers. If hard drugs were controlled to the same extent I can see the exact same thing taking place. It's a vicious circle.

 

[edgray]

medical MJ has been legal in Canada for quite a few years. The contracts and permits to grow it are awarded by the federal gov't. They also set the standards for it's potency which is too low according to those that have prescriptions. Because of that many of the patients have resorted to buying their smoke from street level dealers. If hard drugs were controlled to the same extent I can see the exact same thing taking place. It's a vicious circle.

that's because your govt hasn't legalised it beyond a vague attempt at making it medically available. It's really not in the same ball park as complete legalisation.

 

[dt3]

Can you point to any fully-legalized countries that show a drastic decrease in the price of drugs following the legislation? Id look it up myself, but I'm on my phone, its a pain in the ass, and I'm lazy...

 

[edgray]

Can you point to any fully-legalized countries that show a drastic decrease in the price of drugs following the legislation? Id look it up myself, but I'm on my phone, its a pain in the ass, and I'm lazy...

I don't believe there's any country on earth that has fully legalised drugs.

But it's pretty simple logic. Drugs pass through the hands of many dealers before they reach the streets. Each dealer adds their mark-up. Not to mention the traffickers before them, who, by taking enormous risk to smuggle the drugs, have a huge incentive to add a big mark-up.

I did read that Diamorphine (heroin) Costs the British NHS around 1GBP per gram for 100% stuff. Compare that to the stuff on the street: 120GBP per gram of perhaps 5 - 10% pure stuff.

There's also the possibility of course that private enterprise would be involved in the manufacturing of drugs. Perhaps the market competitiveness would help keep the price down.

Either way, just be removing the dealers mark-up, you'll have a large reduction.