All drugs (not just soft drugs) should be legalized and the agreement should be global. Otherwise, the problem of corruption, violence, smuggling, etc. would hardly be trivialized. (An impossible) 3.- It allows the accumulation of a “know-how” with drugs (how to take them, cultural opportunities that open …) – that the liberal society satisfies the highest needs of the individual (every man for himself), which makes life much more interesting and the search for intoxication superfluous. Perhaps that is the compensation mechanism I was looking for in the previous point. The “system” has resulted in the highest incarceration rate in the world. For black men aged 20 to 24, it`s one in nine. 80% of all arrests are for drug possession, 40% of drug-related arrests for marijuana. Imagine you have a liquor store. If someone steals a bottle of vodka and you find out, you can call the police without resorting to violence. But if you`re selling marijuana or crack cocaine and someone tries to steal from you, you have to fight them because you have no support from the law. And you need to make sure that no one bothers you anymore. The war on drugs, as Charles Bowden said, creates a war on drugs, with weapons and blood.
With regard to state market regularization, as proposed by anti-prohibitions, those who consider legalization unnecessary argue that addicts would be tricked into buying on the illegal market. Where certainly the prices would be lower, although their quality has also decreased. Therefore, the crime would not be over. We have already talked about the pros and cons of drugs in another article, which you also wrote in connection with this other article on Why do people take drugs? can read. Most governments around the world are determined to spend more resources and further undermine the freedoms of their citizens to stop the illegal drug trade. The best is the enemy of the good, and if prohibition has been implemented gradually (only 15 countries have signed the Hague Opium Convention of 1912), its end is also gradual, but it must be borne in mind that today there are countries or regions (even some “dry” districts in the United States) where alcohol is banned and its sale is punishable by very severe penalties. And if there is illegal trade from neighboring countries, the problem they have because of their fanaticism is not the neighbors. Well, in the case of drugs, it should be exactly the same: if a country wants mafias and hangings for victimless crimes, it eats it with its bread. And if the neighbor wants to legalize everything and put vending machines on the street, he should do it.
That is sovereignty. The section dealing with this issue in the NIT document is “Options for Treaty Reform” – but one is not for the work to support this destroyed building, but for the demolition on the ground. Do you now understand why the number of kidnappings increased in the United States during alcohol prohibition and in Mexico and Colombia with drug prohibition? Is anyone telling me that drugs are legalized? Explanation, reasoning, evidence and conclusion One of the immediate consequences of legalization would be an increase in consumption. Although guinea pig experiments show that drug use increases or decreases in proportion to the ease or difficulty of obtaining it, we know that other factors affect people. Drug legalization and community support services are the real remedy, including significant funding for treatment. In 2002, only one fifth of drug drugs were used for rehabilitation. Equally important is the elimination of poverty and the lack of opportunities that make drugs attractive. And in Bolivia, the remaining drugs are legalized? And are marijuana and cocaine legalized? Even their use is criminalized, I repeat: to end (or minimize) corruption and violence, all drugs should be legalized and in all countries (when prohibition ended, the mafia set to work to find other substances for trafficking).