Yes, the only secure way for drugs is harm reduction. People will always do drugs, no reason to create and support criminal, murdering, organizations and let adult people responsible for their own bodies support these, while turning these same people into criminals. In this way you can also have more control over who does what and put an age restriction on it that will at least hamper the efforts of teenagers to do drugs, who in studies are constantly proven to be the most susceptible to harm from drug use.
I have no idea why this is not already the accepted norm around the world. I have no idea why we want the situation in Colombia and Mexico to be how it is, or in your nearest poor US neighbourhood. With this approach even those of you that hate drugs the most and are firmly against letting other adults control their own bodies can gain something, since the drugs would be taxated. Those taxes could go in to rehabilitation programs, and therefore the whole drug system would support itself. No more of your tax money would go on helping filthy addicts, instead the filthy addicts help themselves.
For those of you who think crazy lunatic murdering junkies would roam the streets, pretty much every country with some form of legalization has a lower rate of addicts and users than for example the US. And for those of you that talk about krokodil and other completely horrible drugs - with access to safe, clean and "good" heroin, krokodil would not exist. Overdoses would happen much less frequently as well, as one of the more common causes of overdosing is that you can't know how strong the batch of heroin that you bought is.
That would probably be the same for meth, as meth is super easy to produce, but is so fucking dirty with so many nasty side effects. I don't think your normal methjunkie would say no to going over to the slightly more clean amphetamine if it was available and cheap. I have nothing to support this of course.
Log in to comment