Should we legalize and regulate all drugs?


White_Unifier
#1
What if we just legalized and regulated every recreational drug be it nicotine, alcohol, gambling, heroin, meth, you name it, but then we just strictly regulated it. One scenario I could see would be to legalize it but regulate it similarly to how Singapore regulates casinos. If you want in, you have to apply for either a passport or an addictive-products-and-services-business (APSB) ID card, with each following slightly different rules.

If you apply for a standard passport, you could enter any such business just by scanning your passport and fingerprint. The scanner would recognize the passport as a legal passport but could not identify its holder nor recognize your fingerprint. On that, it would allow you entry. Alternatively, you could apply for an enhanced passport at extra cost that would include a scan of your fingerprints (or an indicator of any missing finger-tip) and facial image and would allow you to sign a self-exclusion form. With that, the scanner could identify the passport's holder and your fingerprint, could determine if the two match (so as to prevent a person from borrowing a friend's passport) and could deny you entry. Even if you somehow still managed to enter the premises, the facial-recognition camera could still potentially identify you. The self-exclusion would apply for the duration of the passport's validity period.

This could even allow partial exclusion. For example, a person could choose to not sign the self-exclusion form but still let his spouse hold his passport. This would mean that he couldn't enter a casino on his own since the scanner would recognize his fingerprint but not his passport and so would deny him entry. This would mean he could visit a casino only when accompanied by his spouse for example.

If you apply for a standard APSB ID card, the scanner would recognize it as a legal card but not identify its holder and would not recognize your fingerprint and so would allow you entry. Alternatively, you could apply at extra cost for an enhanced APSB card that would include facial and fingerprint scanning in which case the scanner could identify the holder of the card and the fingerprint and identify the two as matching to the same person and so deny you entry.

The self-exclusion form could also make it a misdemeanor offense punishable by a heavy fine for any person in the self-exclusion database to participate in any addictive activity from which he'd excluded himself and impose a heavy fine on any business that allowed a self-excluded person into the premises.

On the advertising front, these businesses could advertise on only one state-approved website and to access the site, one would need to clearly identify himself as not on the self-exclusion database. This might mean having to register an account on the site in person at a passport office or at a casino or other registration office and, once an account is registered, require him to sign in each time he visits the site to access its advertising. We could even prohibit these businesses from being identifiable from the outside, meaning that they'd have to hide behind a front business or residence or at least not advertise themselves on the outside of their business.
 
spilledthebeer
#2
Quote: Originally Posted by White_Unifier View Post

What if we just legalized and regulated every recreational drug be it nicotine, alcohol, gambling, heroin, meth, you name it, but then we just strictly regulated it. One scenario I could see would be to legalize it but regulate it similarly to how Singapore regulates casinos. If you want in, you have to apply for either a passport or an addictive-products-and-services-business (APSB) ID card, with each following slightly different rules.

If you apply for a standard passport, you could enter any such business just by scanning your passport and fingerprint. The scanner would recognize the passport as a legal passport but could not identify its holder nor recognize your fingerprint. On that, it would allow you entry. Alternatively, you could apply for an enhanced passport at extra cost that would include a scan of your fingerprints (or an indicator of any missing finger-tip) and facial image and would allow you to sign a self-exclusion form. With that, the scanner could identify the passport's holder and your fingerprint, could determine if the two match (so as to prevent a person from borrowing a friend's passport) and could deny you entry. Even if you somehow still managed to enter the premises, the facial-recognition camera could still potentially identify you. The self-exclusion would apply for the duration of the passport's validity period.

This could even allow partial exclusion. For example, a person could choose to not sign the self-exclusion form but still let his spouse hold his passport. This would mean that he couldn't enter a casino on his own since the scanner would recognize his fingerprint but not his passport and so would deny him entry. This would mean he could visit a casino only when accompanied by his spouse for example.

If you apply for a standard APSB ID card, the scanner would recognize it as a legal card but not identify its holder and would not recognize your fingerprint and so would allow you entry. Alternatively, you could apply at extra cost for an enhanced APSB card that would include facial and fingerprint scanning in which case the scanner could identify the holder of the card and the fingerprint and identify the two as matching to the same person and so deny you entry.

The self-exclusion form could also make it a misdemeanor offense punishable by a heavy fine for any person in the self-exclusion database to participate in any addictive activity from which he'd excluded himself and impose a heavy fine on any business that allowed a self-excluded person into the premises.

On the advertising front, these businesses could advertise on only one state-approved website and to access the site, one would need to clearly identify himself as not on the self-exclusion database. This might mean having to register an account on the site in person at a passport office or at a casino or other registration office and, once an account is registered, require him to sign in each time he visits the site to access its advertising. We could even prohibit these businesses from being identifiable from the outside, meaning that they'd have to hide behind a front business or residence or at least not advertise themselves on the outside of their business.




Legalize ALL drugs????? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


LIE-berals want to turn us all into stoned and zoned out, totally irresponsible zombie children!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Consider:




Here is an article showing that stupid ideas never die- they just rattle around in LIE-beral brains for a while before resurfacing. With some comments of my own in brackets):

Methadone madness? Liberals removing barriers to prescription heroin in response to opioid epidemic

From Canadian Press. Published: March 26, 2018. Updated: March 26, 2018 12:36 PM EDT

Filed Under: Toronto SUN/ Life/ Health

OTTAWA — Access to treatment for opioid addiction is about to get easier as the government promises changes to drug laws that will do away with some of the obstacles preventing doctors from offering prescription heroin and methadone.

(Apparently LIE-berals do not recall the reason WHY access to methadone was TIGHTENED UP several decades back! Something to do with addicts getting multiple doses of methadone and spending a LOT of time really STONED and out of things- on the public dime!)

(Methadone is certainly a safer drug than heroin or morphine- but it IS dangerous in its own right if abused- which this LIE-beral plan to make easier access will facilitate! People with long memories will recall the drug trial in which a father faced murder or manslaughter charges due to the death of his daughter- the druggie Dad had been allowed “carry privileges- that is he was considered reliable enough to take home a substantial supply of methadone and to consume it as prescribed. Problem is Dad kept his stock ready to use- mixed with orange juice in the fridge and his thirsty daughter made the FATAL MISTAKE of drinking a glass and DIED of the over dose! Even an addict seeking a govt supplied methadone fix can O.D. on the stuff! People on methadone generally are NOT allowed to drive! Muddled LIE-berals substitute one poison for another!)

Forthcoming legal changes will allow patients to access, when appropriate, prescribed heroin outside of a hospital setting, such as addiction clinics, making it easier for them to balance their treatment with daily responsibilities.

The government is also making methadone more accessible, allowing health-care practitioners to prescribe and administer it without needing to apply for an exemption from federal law.

(And WHO is to regulate this dandy new access to powerful drugs? Last time around a number of corrupt doctors faced legal action for supplying addicts with multiple doses and govt was forced to restrict access and tighten up rules and inspections of numbers of prescriptions written and patients ALLEGEDLY seen! Some unscrupulous doctors happily took govt money for tending to phantom patients! LIE-berals have NO new ideas- only old ones they have forgotten were failures!)

Health Minister Ginette Petitpas Taylor said Monday that removing barriers to treatment is crucial to combat what her department describes as a national public health crisis that continues to devastate families and communities.

“We know way too many parents, sisters, brothers, daughters, sons or loved ones who have died because of opioids,” she said. “I believe we can turn the tide on this crisis. And we can do it together.”

(LIE-berals consider that it is necessary they do something- but have NO ideas that will not either cost them votes or interfere with their supply of gravy!)

Health Canada estimates about 2,900 people died in 2016 as a result of the crisis and estimates slated to be released Tuesday suggest the epidemic claimed more than 4,000 lives last year.

(Shall we ask if the numbers have been handled just like LIE-beral deficit numbers- changed to make the opiod crisis look more important? LIE-beral numbers must ALWAYS be suspect to honest observers these days!)

The Controlled Drug and Substances Act currently requires that physicians apply for an exemption from federal law to be allowed to prescribe, administer, sell or provide methadone.

The government’s announced changes will mean doctors no longer require an exemption, something Petitpas Taylor says is a barrier that discourages the treatment from being offered.

(As mentioned- WHO will supervise this LIE-beral MESS? There are already major questions surrounding the amount of Opiods being prescribed for natives- with nobody making any effort to track the suppliers! Relaxed methadone and heroin supply rules will simply supply a new addiction option- but LIE-berals do not care just so long as addicts and natives continue to vote LIE-beral! As for dropping the license requirement for doctors- should not only experts in the addiction fiedl being the ONLY ones offering methadone and heroin? Why let any garden variety GP hand it out now unsupervised- since its gone wrong before?)

The new regulations are expected to come into effect in May and stem from recent recommendations from the Canadian Research Initiative in Substances Misuse.

(Oh! LIE-beral loving poverty pimps have told LIE-berals what they want to hear about how to buy addict and poverty pimp social worker voter support!)

Last month’s federal budget earmarked $231 million to improve access to treatment, address stigma and gather data on the opioid crisis.

(But options which involve legal limitations on access to powerful drugs are seen as heavy handed and draconian by LIE-berals lost in their own Sunny Ways?)

That includes $18.7 million over five years to tackle the stigma faced by people who use drugs, which includes a public education campaign aimed at changing stereotypes.

(Oh right! An honest pubic perception of drug addicts as living on welfare and getting free drugs and shop lifting to augment their income might make LIE-beral loving poverty pimps uncomfortable! Too bad LIE-berals cannot admit that 9 year old Lisa Podniewitz was beaten to death by her addicted parents under the supervision of poverty pimps who see addicts only as victims! On the day Lisa died of Pneumonia brought on by broken ribs and breathing troubles- a social worker dropped in to check on her- and put a nice ankle bracelet on her- and never noticed the kid also had a broken leg! Coddling hard core addicts SHOULD NOT be part of the LIE-beral plan and some inane commercials will not change that!)

“Stigma is a huge barrier for people getting the treatment that they need. And it’s not acceptable,” Petitpas Taylor said.

(Oh? LIE-berals want to suggest that admitting you are an addict in need of help is a greater stigma than laying in alleyway in your own filth- with a dirty needle in your arm and a serious risk of AIDS thrown in for good measure? And what of all those women prostituting themselves for their next hit? What of the native Cdn woman who was in the news a few years back giving birth to her 8th- or was it 10th child? With each one born addicted to drugs and suffering from fetal alcohol syndrome and suffering from an array of disabilities from drug abuse?)

She did not provide a date for when the education campaign would roll out, but emphasized it would happen as soon as possible.

(The biggest difficulty in writing an education program for this crap will be saying something that will NOT result in LIE-berals being immediately laughed out of the room by an angry and disgusted public!)

Dr. Jeff Turnbull, director of Ottawa Inner City Health, which provides health care to the homeless community, said improving access to opioid-addiction treatment is welcome news, but much more remains to be done beyond stabilizing a medical condition.

“You have to find stable housing, you have to find support, you have to treat their underlying mental health problems and their addiction is all part of that,” Turnbull said.

“The real work begins now.”

(LIE-berals have long ago written off any person who requires real mental health aid as being too costly to bother treating- LIE-beral need for gravy is DIRE- its why they refuse to force treatment on those in mental distress! And yes- LIE-berals have just announced some new funding for mental health but there is NO provision for forcing treatment on crazy people who are not able to make any sensible long term choices! To many people go off their meds once out of hospital and then re-offend!)

Deirdre Freiheit, head of the Ottawa-based harm-reduction organization Shepherds of Good Hope, applauded the announcement and stressed the importance of tackling stigma.

“Our clients have been vilified often by many rather than supported,” she said.

(Oh yes- the stigma is the major obstacle to desperate addicts that have prostituted themselves and STOLEN and sold ANYTHING they can get their hands on including their mothers wedding ring and jewellery! And it is NOT so easy for an addict to get another job after having been caught STEALING from his old boss and then serving jail time for it! Aggressive prevention- such as tracking chemicals needed for drug production- seems a more practical approach- but LIE-berals would rather legalize heroin and save their gravy than make major efforts to cut drug supplies- its an admission of TOTAL current LIE-beral policy failure! )

“They’ve been judged for being in crisis rather than being supported. People have placed barriers in front of them — physical, emotional, systemic — rather than broken them down.”

(You cannot make a horrific mess of your life and betray your own family and friends and cheat your employer without repercussions- this is why prevention is such a NECESSARY issue of drug strategy! Poverty pimps see addicts as clients while many Cdns see them as a PLAGUE! LIE-beral advertising- that we cannot afford will NOT change that view- it will just ANNOY and insult tax payers!)

Of the $231 million set aside in the federal budget for the opioid crisis, $150 million will go to provinces and territories to improve access to treatment, about $32 million will help border security intercept fentanyl and other illegal substances and nearly $18 million will improve research and access to public-health data and analysis.

(That`s nice- LIE-berals DO SO LOVE throwing money at problems- too bad LIE-berals care more for image than results!)

(The entire LIE-beral attitude to addicts and dealers needs MAJOR revision! One has only to think of the Toronto Lucky Moose Market that magnet for a certain drug addicted shoplifter who snatched and grabbed flowers and other merchandise that he could sell for his habit or eat since he had spent all his money on drugs! And the market owner could not get cop help- the usual thing- short handed- and so he trapped the addict himself and ended up being charged with KIDNAPPING for imprisoning the addict! And LIE-berals WAIVED the theft and drug charges to ensure the addict would testify against the shop owner! LIE-berasl seem confused as to who the vicitm is in this crap!)

(Perhaps LIE-berals should consider the old Chinese custom of caning dealers? In the year 1900- the number of Opium addicts in China comprised 60 percent of the entire population between ages 15 and 55- and desperate Chinese leaders offered treatment for addicts and SERIOUS PUNISHMENT was offered to anybody convicted of drug dealing! The caning would certainly be cheaper than jail- we could have dealers in and out in a week! LIE-berals WOULD save gravy in such a way- but might lose votes so its no go! Massive debts and Sunny Ways are the LIE-beral focus!)
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
#3
How much is the regulation going to cost? That is the first question that has to be answered!
 
Hoof Hearted
#4
I think we should only regulate the drugs that White Unifier is on.
 
Cliffy
Free Thinker
#5
Every state that has legalized cannabis has made a fortune. But look to Portugal. They legalized all drugs and saved a fortune on the legal system, made a tidy profit and rehabilitated most of the addicts. It is the drug war that has spent billions and has only aggravated the problem. Prohibition is pure insanity.
 
White_Unifier
+1
#6  Top Rated Post
Quote: Originally Posted by Hoof Hearted View Post

I think we should only regulate the drugs that White Unifier is on.

Good luck trying to regulate the dopamine that my own body produces.
 
spaminator
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by White_Unifier View Post

Should we legalize and regulate all drugs?

 
White_Unifier
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by JLM View Post

How much is the regulation going to cost? That is the first question that has to be answered!

I can see two questions in that one question:

1. Who pays?
2. How much?

I'll take gambling, alcohol, and tobacco as examples, but I'll start with gambling.

If Ontario forced all gambling venues to install scanners at each entrance, that's a cost the gambling venue would need to absorb and pass on to its customers either in the form of an entrance fee or in the form of increased losses relative to winnings even compared to now. A person who doesn't want to pay it could just choose to not visit the gambling venue.

If Ontario continues with the present status quo, this saves the gambling venue money but imposes costs on the taxpayer in the form of social assistance for a problem gambler who loses his job and keeps on gambling, law-enforcement costs to deal with problem gamblers who engage in theft, burglaries, illegal debt-collection for criminal loan sharks, prostitution, etc., and health-care costs to deal with problem gamblers who attempt suicide.

The same principle would apply to alcohol, nicotine, or any other addictive product. It's true that the least expensive solution is to just criminalize all of these industries outright. Politically though, that's a non-starter in our present environment, which raises the question of how best to regulate it if we must legalize it so as to reduce the cost to society?
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy View Post

Every state that has legalized cannabis has made a fortune. But look to Portugal. They legalized all drugs and saved a fortune on the legal system, made a tidy profit and rehabilitated most of the addicts. It is the drug war that has spent billions and has only aggravated the problem. Prohibition is pure insanity.

Prohibition didn't work worth a shit in the 1920s and with people now dug in more than ever it sure as hell won't work now. There has to be a sane middle ground somewhere.
 
White_Unifier
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by JLM View Post

Prohibition didn't work worth a shit in the 1920s and with people now dug in more than ever it sure as hell won't work now. There has to be a sane middle ground somewhere.

Actually prohibition probably did accomplish one thing: it made the advertising of alcohol more discreet and pushed bars and liquor shops underground. I could actually see laws creating a kind of legal speakeasy. In other words, it would be legal to sell alcohol but you couldn't advertise your business except on an approved website and would need to hide the business from street view for example. We could then add some kind of self-exclusion policy to keep alcoholics out. Everyone else could easily find the bar and could easily enter it. It just wouldn't be visible from street level and wouldn't be advertised except on the one site online.