Decriminalize all drugs

[Blaidd Drwg]

Iran is located next to the poppy growing capital of the world, hosts a large, impoverished Afghan refugee population, has a young underemployed population (especially in rural areas), has a porous border (as evidenced by the number of Afghan migrants going to Europe who took the Iranian route), extremely limited opportunities for working class Iranians to migrate to find better work, really don't allow international monitors (UN organizations, World Bank, IOM) in to do much assessing outside their oil sector, and have more complex international relationships with their neighbors than Mexico does.

Where exactly is that in the report you cited?

Turd, I';m not upset, I'm just disappointed. I struggle to recall a single point in good faith on an interesting topic this board. It's only after you have taken repeated beatings that you fess up and loosely elaborate these tepid tie ins and obfuscation. You might have had a relevant moment with Iran, perhaps describing why the supply side is a complicated problem to understand. 'In fact there are two MASSIVE black holes in this entire debate that no one really is ready to grapple with.

• Moderate and safe use of hard drugs by people who do not have adverse outcomes and are productive contributors to society (a massive group of people we know not much about), and
  
  The Black Market, which operates in all sectors of all societies to varying degree.

But you didn't do that. If you had just admitted you didn't read it and you were prejudiced against the Lancet but that you had some notion about the Iranian supply side that was key...any of these would have been contributing discussion points.

You'll note I find nothing wrong with your actual stand, what's so endlessly disappointing about your tactic is that rather than lead with what you appear to know, such as gut opinion backed up with some time spent with the treatment literature, you sling these distractions hoping you'll be mistaken for cleverness.

You're only bullshitting yourself.

[Blaidd Drwg]

Just for clarity:

are those in favor of legalization saying that all drugs should be available to all competent adults, without the need for a doctor's prescription?

I don't know that anyone has articualted that, although that is a perfectly legit liberty based approach.

Most everyone is here has argued for some range of decriminalization with interdiction and treatment continued (as we do now) with the greatest net societal benefits being money saved on a failed prohibition program and curing a social justice issue. Asset forfeiture is a tangential major liberty issue we haven't touched on much.

• There appears to be near universal support for legalization of cannabis
  
  Not everyone has grappled with it yet but, based on health and societal risks, mushrooms, mescal, peyote, and several other organic psychedelics probably belong in the legal/retail/taxed category as well. There is very little abuse potential and the pharmacology is safe for most* people, There's some open questions about how people with undiagnosed disorders like schizophrenia, BPD or NPD might be impacted by them.
  
  There are increasing tiers of discomfort with most other catergories (pills/powders) certain other drugs that are very widely used but for which there is a greater potential for short term physical dependence like cocaine, meth, heroin, barbiturates.
  
  There is little or no support I think so far for removal of prescription requirements for strong opiate painkillers which if I were to guess (not guessing but it's not science either) are actually much more easily habit forming than heroin.

There may be a solid 1/4 of these pages are devoted to comments from people who are speaking of decriminalization and legalization interchangeably when they are very far from it.

[nafod]

To toss in a data point, I spent six months in Djibouti, where every day the whole country gets high on khat all afternoon. The most useless country on the planet. But it helps the government to get them to accept their shititude.

[Sangoma]

We can argue forever the causality of drug policy in Portugal and various theories. The most important point was made somewhere earlier in the thread (I think by Nafod): action must be result oriented. Currently drug policy is based on wishful thinking and mostly assumptions, it isn't working and making the situation worse.

As in that definition of madness, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

As to prescription or not - gradual approach is probably the way to go. Loosen restriction one by one and check what happens. I tend to think that legalizing all drugs, including Heroin The Horrible, would be more beneficial anyway. As I mentioned earlier, make it available in specially set up salons with some sort of monitoring and medical care if needed.

A friend of mine (for real, a friend; I will definitely do it next time I visit that city) went to the Marijuana tasting event in Amsterdam. They presented them with 10 small joints of various strains, just like they do with wine of whisky evenings. After three-four samples people started passing out. My friend got severely nauseous after the 7th joint. When he was about to get up and go to the toilet one of the attending guys asked what's the problem. When told about nausea he promptly brought him couple of lines of Cocaine (which apparently acts as the antidote to Cannabis), all included in the admission price. According to my friend it worked on the spot, and he could enjoy the rest of the tasting. To a person raised in the current spirit of "drugs are bad, mkay" this sounds like a horror movie. But though difficult to admit, drug users are more educated than doctors in this area (similar to PEDs). All in all such dens of sin and downfall would be more efficient in dealing with drug related morbidity than twenty SWAT units.

[Blaidd Drwg]

To toss in a data point, I spent six months in Djibouti, where every day the whole country gets high on khat all afternoon. The most useless country on the planet. But it helps the government to get them to accept their shititude.

Which is weird given the stimulant nature of the plant. Contrast this with Andean shepherds who drink coca tea all day and work their bony asses to the nub.

I blame Islam.

[Yes, I'm drunk]

Just for clarity:

are those in favor of legalization saying that all drugs should be available to all competent adults, without the need for a doctor's prescription?

I don't know that anyone has articualted that, although that is a perfectly legit liberty based approach.

Most everyone is here has argued for some range of decriminalization with interdiction and treatment continued (as we do now) with the greatest net societal benefits being money saved on a failed prohibition program and curing a social justice issue. Asset forfeiture is a tangential major liberty issue we haven't touched on much.

• There appears to be near universal support for legalization of cannabis
  
  Not everyone has grappled with it yet but, based on health and societal risks, mushrooms, mescal, peyote, and several other organic psychedelics probably belong in the legal/retail/taxed category as well. There is very little abuse potential and the pharmacology is safe for most* people, There's some open questions about how people with undiagnosed disorders like schizophrenia, BPD or NPD might be impacted by them.
  
  There are increasing tiers of discomfort with most other catergories (pills/powders) certain other drugs that are very widely used but for which there is a greater potential for short term physical dependence like cocaine, meth, heroin, barbiturates.
  
  There is little or no support I think so far for removal of prescription requirements for strong opiate painkillers which if I were to guess (not guessing but it's not science either) are actually much more easily habit forming than heroin.

There may be a solid 1/4 of these pages are devoted to comments from people who are speaking of decriminalization and legalization interchangeably when they are very far from it.

This doesn't really clarify anything.

I'm wondering, as just one specific example among thousands, whether antibiotics fall into the libertarian basket when it comes to drug legalization? Should we liberalize access to those and leave it up to the individual to decide on how they might or might not use them, and to what extent they might or might not use them?

[Sangoma]

To toss in a data point, I spent six months in Djibouti, where every day the whole country gets high on khat all afternoon. The most useless country on the planet. But it helps the government to get them to accept their shititude.

Which is weird given the stimulant nature of the plant. Contrast this with Andean shepherds who drink coca tea all day and work their bony asses to the nub.

I blame Islam.

There are many reasons for many outcomes, and people tend to choose associations to prove their point. Djibouti is a useless place like most other African countries, and it is probably nothing to do with khat - or Islam, as many other places in Africa are Christian and useless nevertheless.

[Sangoma]

In regards to antibiotics, in Saudi Arabia all antibiotics are dispensed without prescription. I am not aware of problems related to it.

[Blaidd Drwg]

Just for clarity:

are those in favor of legalization saying that all drugs should be available to all competent adults, without the need for a doctor's prescription?

I don't know that anyone has articualted that, although that is a perfectly legit liberty based approach.

Most everyone is here has argued for some range of decriminalization with interdiction and treatment continued (as we do now) with the greatest net societal benefits being money saved on a failed prohibition program and curing a social justice issue. Asset forfeiture is a tangential major liberty issue we haven't touched on much.

• There appears to be near universal support for legalization of cannabis
  
  Not everyone has grappled with it yet but, based on health and societal risks, mushrooms, mescal, peyote, and several other organic psychedelics probably belong in the legal/retail/taxed category as well. There is very little abuse potential and the pharmacology is safe for most* people, There's some open questions about how people with undiagnosed disorders like schizophrenia, BPD or NPD might be impacted by them.
  
  There are increasing tiers of discomfort with most other catergories (pills/powders) certain other drugs that are very widely used but for which there is a greater potential for short term physical dependence like cocaine, meth, heroin, barbiturates.
  
  There is little or no support I think so far for removal of prescription requirements for strong opiate painkillers which if I were to guess (not guessing but it's not science either) are actually much more easily habit forming than heroin.

There may be a solid 1/4 of these pages are devoted to comments from people who are speaking of decriminalization and legalization interchangeably when they are very far from it.

This doesn't really clarify anything.

I'm wondering, as just one specific example among thousands, whether antibiotics fall into the libertarian basket when it comes to drug legalization? Should we liberalize access to those and leave it up to the individual to decide on how they might or might not use them, and to what extent they might or might not use them?

I was clarifying what people HERE have said, very little of which falls into a pro legalization of all things all the time.

Under a "libertarian" (whatever that means) model. ALL DRUGS would be freely available to any adult and could be bought and sold by any other adult. This is a freedom rubric that has nothing to do with pharmacology and everything to do with freedom to choose who you to do business with.

To your question: Specifically yes, in most countries in S America, antibiotics are available OTC. Same is true in much of Asia. Parts of Africa are similar as I understand it.

Conversely, strong pain medicine is not freely available. You can order most prescription drugs that don't fall into the narco/barbiturate category very easily from most countries not currently obsessed with nanny state bullshit.

[DrDonkeyLove]

In regards to antibiotics, in Saudi Arabia all antibiotics are dispensed without prescription. I am not aware of problems related to it.

I got to view this in real life.

One was a Canadian/Indian who went into the pharmacy to pick up some kind of oral steroid w/o a prescription for an ailment related to calcium stones or something that were forming under his skin that was diagnosed via FaceTime or something similar with an Indian doctor.

The other was an Egyptian who had consistent diarrhea and was self treating himself with continual doses of self prescribed antibiotics. I don't know if he was damaged by the antibiotics, eventually got better, or died from something deadly that was ignored while he was fucking around with antibiotics.

Interesting point here about antibiotics because these conversations usually focus on drugs that make you high. Should indiscriminate antibiotic use, which creates increasingly resistant strains of bacteria, be allowed?

This takes us back to the individual freedom vs. good of society loop. Should I be allowed to get high as fuck on whatever I want but prohibited from trying to get rid of a sore throat?

[Yes, I'm drunk]

Under a "libertarian" (whatever that means) model. ALL DRUGS would be freely available to any adult and could be bought and sold by any other adult. This is a freedom rubric that has nothing to do with pharmacology and everything to do with freedom to choose who you to do business with.

I'm glad you've admitted this. Earlier you were making a "harm reduction" case for drug legalization; at least now we know that "harm reduction" is a redundant concept when complete and total access to all drugs is a "rubric" of freedom under the libertarian formulation.

[Blaidd Drwg]

Under a "libertarian" (whatever that means) model. ALL DRUGS would be freely available to any adult and could be bought and sold by any other adult. This is a freedom rubric that has nothing to do with pharmacology and everything to do with freedom to choose who you to do business with.

I'm glad you've admitted this. Earlier you were making a "harm reduction" case for drug legalization; at least now we know that "harm reduction" is a redundant concept when complete and total access to all drugs is a "rubric" of freedom under the libertarian formulation.

Uhhhh..Admit? Odd word choice but I ADMITTEDLY don't track what you're getting at.

If you followed any of the lit that's been cited so far, all of these measures, whether legalization or decriminalization are focused on the goal of harm reduction. Whether that is harm from the State (expensive overreach in criminalizing something known to be benign such as cannabis and mushrooms) or whether that harm is criminalizing addiction behaviors (which results in addicts avoiding treatment help.) the whole discussion is on balancing the known harms that we are experiencing in the US (I give no fucks about UK drug policy particular). In the Czech and Portugal models the goal was in part to save money and large part to stave off an HIV epidemic. That's kinda the perfect blend of two legit harm reducing policy objectives.

I've not argued a "libertarian approach" at all. Though, I think there's a valid argument under strongly held libertarian principles (personal responsibility/freedom of association/freedom to enter into contracts/freedom to self determination etc) I don't even think that Dunce Rudy is pretending this is a libertarian windmill that needs tilting. If you tracked any of this discussion, no one here seems to think that The US could make that leap given the current status of what is being called an "opiate epidemic. "...especially opening up what no one in particular is asking for (access without RX to All drugs).

As for me, liberty is a serious underlying consideration but by no stretch is it the main consideration of this discussion.

[Yes, I'm drunk]

I've not argued a "libertarian approach" at all.

Indeed. You've cited the drugs policy of "parts of Africa" as a model for which the US might follow.

[nafod]

In regards to antibiotics, in Saudi Arabia all antibiotics are dispensed without prescription. I am not aware of problems related to it.

Interesting point here about antibiotics because these conversations usually focus on drugs that make you high. Should indiscriminate antibiotic use, which creates increasingly resistant strains of bacteria, be allowed?

You can google on "superbugs Saudi Arabia" and these issues are brought up, of overuse of antibiotics in the kingdom. They've got some sort of resistant bug exploding in the gulf states now. Watched a frontline episode about this last night.

[Turdacious]

We can argue forever the causality of drug policy in Portugal and various theories. The most important point was made somewhere earlier in the thread (I think by Nafod): action must be result oriented.

That's what pretty much everybody here has been saying except BD.

[Blaidd Drwg]

I've not argued a "libertarian approach" at all.

Indeed. You've cited the drugs policy of "parts of Africa" as a model for which the US might follow.

Are you that pathologically disingenuous? I believe l cited locations where antibiotics are available without Rx. I made no conclusions as to the applicability.

[Blaidd Drwg]

We can argue forever the causality of drug policy in Portugal and various theories. The most important point was made somewhere earlier in the thread (I think by Nafod): action must be result oriented.

That's what pretty much everybody here has been saying except BD.

That's a lie. A poor one. You know damn well that's not the case.

I used to think you were worth taking seriously on some subjects. It's clear you're not.

[Turdacious]

We can argue forever the causality of drug policy in Portugal and various theories. The most important point was made somewhere earlier in the thread (I think by Nafod): action must be result oriented.

That's what pretty much everybody here has been saying except BD.

That's a lie. A poor one. You know damn well that's not the case.

I used to think you were worth taking seriously on some subjects. It's clear you're not.

Hyperbole and horseshit. You take results seriously only inasmuch as you already agree with them.

[Blaidd Drwg]

Apparently you are as stupid as you seem. I've made my arguments on a wide range of sources including something closeted cowards like you will always lack, first person experience.

In the end I agree most closely with Sagoma, although I don't think the US is ready for as much legalization as we might hope. I've been crystal clear on my stance and approach which you've not read nor understood.

You can keep making excuses, obfuscating, bullshitting yourself and others. At the end of the day, your arguments reflect a feeble cowardly and timid approach to conservatism. No one buys it now. I'd be surprised if anyone ever did.

[Yes, I'm drunk]

Are you that pathologically disingenuous? I believe l cited locations where antibiotics are available without Rx. I made no conclusions as to the applicability.

I asked you this question:

Should we liberalize access to those [antibiotics] and leave it up to the individual to decide on how they might or might not use them.....

And you answered:

To your question: Specifically yes, in most countries in S America, antibiotics are available OTC. Same is true in much of Asia. Parts of Africa are similar as I understand it.

So you answered in the affirmative that antibiotics should be freely accessible in the US. You cited that this already happens in "part of Africa". You previously disavowed the libertarian rationale for legalization by saying:

I've not argued a "libertarian approach" at all.

...so I'm not really sure what your argument is, or why you keep denying that you've said something, when it's there in black and white that you actually did say it.

I sought clarity, but got sophistry. This is why I generally stay away from internet discussions these days.

[Blaidd Drwg]

I stand corrected. I misunderstood the question and had not intended to offer an opinion on "should" ...only my knowledge that yes they ARE available in many parts of the world. OTC. I don't really have a strong opinion on antibiotics.

There's pros and cons to both but I have no knowledge of the specifics other than I avoiding dying in Ecuador but buying soem truly massive horsepills OTC. Sorry for the confusion....but by all means please do avoid the internet generally and IGX specifically.

[Sangoma]

In regards to superbugs exploding in Saudi - I don't think it is any different anywhere else. Australian newspapers, for instance, talk about the next Superbug that is about to wipe out everybody at least couple of times a year.

Prescription practices of antibiotics have been so bad in the last couple decades that I don't think making them available OTC makes any difference. IN Australia, for example, most GPs will prescribe them if you demand it. Or you can get them from a pharmacist. Just like with any other drugs, education is the key.

[Sangoma]

Curiously, if you look hard enough you will find a GP who is liberal in prescribing opioids. I regularly come across patients who get Oxycontin and Endone for "better sleep".

[Blaidd Drwg]

In regards to superbugs exploding in Saudi - I don't think it is any different anywhere else. Australian newspapers, for instance, talk about the next Superbug that is about to wipe out everybody at least couple of times a year.

Prescription practices of antibiotics have been so bad in the last couple decades that I don't think making them available OTC makes any difference. IN Australia, for example, most GPs will prescribe them if you demand it. Or you can get them from a pharmacist. Just like with any other drugs, education is the key.

It's seems to me that the thing keeping Antibiotics from widespread irresponsible use in Ecuador was the cost...the shit was cheap for me bu at least a weeks wages for a lot of people. I'm guessing most people there are too poor to go to the Pharmacy every 20 min they are exposed to pathogens.

Or maybe they are just smarter and have better gut flora.

[Turdacious]

In regards to superbugs exploding in Saudi - I don't think it is any different anywhere else. Australian newspapers, for instance, talk about the next Superbug that is about to wipe out everybody at least couple of times a year.

Prescription practices of antibiotics have been so bad in the last couple decades that I don't think making them available OTC makes any difference. IN Australia, for example, most GPs will prescribe them if you demand it. Or you can get them from a pharmacist. Just like with any other drugs, education is the key.

It's seems to me that the thing keeping Antibiotics from widespread irresponsible use in Ecuador was the cost...the shit was cheap for me bu at least a weeks wages for a lot of people. I'm guessing most people there are too poor to go to the Pharmacy every 20 min they are exposed to pathogens.

Or maybe they are just smarter and have better gut flora.

Or they don't interfere with natural selection enough
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP. ... t&sort=asc