The Drug Addiciton Excuse

As with anything, take away the risks associated with the highsand the illegality and you have less of a propensity to want it. And, Hell, if you can afford to buy these legalized former "illicit drugs" then you will also subject yourself to the drug testing that many firms enforce.
It seems obvious to me that legalizing would cut down on the crime, even though I don't believe it plays a direct roll as far as the increase in crime.

But I would have tried marijuana in college had it been legal, perhaps mushrooms too. I went through a very sheltered childhood then was an athlete for 2 years and still abstained. Later in college I tried drinking and smoking, but both were just a phase for me, though one that lowered my grades considerably....I intended to be a teacher, so illicit drugs were out, but enough people around me were smoking weed, I know I would have tried it if it were legal.

Maybe this isn't a good enough reason, maybe it shows weakness of character, but its my honest opinion.

By the way, I really like your blog. You ok if I link it on my blog roll?

Well, part of why I would prefer a federalized solution is to see exactly how much crime is reduced by legalization.

My argument for legalization is actually base don a belief that adults have the right to harm themselves as much as they want without the state having any say in it, crime reduction is just a secondary benefit.

And, I have to admit that, were crime reduced by eliminating drug dealing as a career, it would not be a 1 to 1 drop. Without the allure of massive profits, some of the criminals may not be drawn to crime at all. Others would probably still find another sort of crime to pursue, so criminality would not drop as much as some argue.

If nothing else, allowing some states to legalize, some to ban, and others to stay somewhere in the middle would allow us to see just what the pros and cons would be. Yet another advantage to a true federalism, without policy being influenced so strongly by the central government.

IN high school, college and for a time afterward I drank like a fish, and dabbled in various and sundry types of drug abuse. I still smoke, as I have allow myself one vice, but the rest went away with age.

My thinking is that if drugs were legal, some may try them who would not, so the number who had ever used drugs would be a bit higher, but I doubt anyone would become an addict who would not also be an addict while they were illegal.

Then again, maybe the numbers would go up somewhat. Or drop. It is hard to predict such hypothetical with certainty. As I think drugs should be legal on a theory that you can do as much harm to yourself as you want, it really doesn't matter to me. As long as I am not paying someone else's medical bills for his self-abuse, I don't care.

Well, I car eon a humanitarian level, but I also respect others enough to think they know better than I do what they should be doing. If someone thinks drugs are his proper course, who am I to tell him otherwise? I lack the arrogance it requires to tell someone I know best what eh should do with his life.

So, I think it really doesn't matter that much if usage goes up or down, but I have a suspicion that it would not rise greatly. (Drinking rose somewhat in the 1930's, but (1) we had a depression to make people drink and (2) people respected the law a lot more in the 1920's than today.)

As far as the blog roll is concerned, feel free to link to me. I will be adding you to the friends list as soon as my edit function starts working again.