Legalizing Vices

This has come up in a few different threads, so I figured I'd start a dedicated one for it. There's a bit of movement to legalize a number of vices, most prominently marijuana. What would be the benefits and costs of such an action be?

I really can't see a reason not to legalize pot (if someone has one, I'm all ears), but the others are a bit trickier. I think prostitution should be legalized largely so it can be properly regulated. Make sure the girls don't have STD's, aren't being abused, and so on.

[unacceptable personal comment cut — Fighteer]

And, well, benefits would include spending less on stupid pseudo-wars and earning money on taxes.

edited 17th Jan '12 12:54:39 PM by Fighteer

Generally speaking, if a government wants to reduce health concerns (or whatever was the original reason for banning the vice in the first place) you can continue to discourage the activity despite legalisation.

Usually, policing a ban is much more expensive than a slow anti-vice education campaign and sin taxes help mitigate the cost of running those programs.

Flyboy, it is not acceptable to reply to a thread with a comment like, "I knew who started this before I looked at it" or the converse. That constitutes a personal attack.

Prostitution should definitely be legalised. It's not always about oppressed women with no choice - what about those who enjoy it? I've got a cam-girl/dominatrix friend who is happier than she's ever been in her life since she started doing it. Yes, she gets her money for sexual activities, but she's an independant business woman running her own enterprise. So are thousands of others. Obviously, she's not on the street, but it's increasingly common for students to pay off their debts by working a bit during their studies, and some of them certainly do it because they enjoy sex. Is't getting paid to do what you love the dream?

On the less pleasant side of that coin, the legalisation of The Oldest Profession would also ensure support for those who would rather have a way out or need help. It is legal in some countries, so there must be case studies on the subject.

Drug legalisation is a huge matter, but I completely support full legalisation of everything despite being not a fan of any besides caffeine and the occasional alcohol dose. Tax it like tobacco and alcohol - i.e. to the high heavens - and you'll have a cash surplus as you do with those. That's even after paying for the support clinics, quality control centres, healthcare, etc.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean it to be insulting at all. I was just surprised, because this is his chosen area of significant discussion, most of the time, down to the term usage.

In any case, the only way this could terribly wrong is if whoever is in charge of the legalization does a shit job of it.

You make some great points. I really would like to see this put up to a national debate, but unfortunately I think the stigma is so high that it'll take a long time before such a discussion can be held on a large level.

@Cassias: I agree with you to a point...however, only if there is detailed information available with regard to the risks (this includes sex, as the sex-ed system in America is deplorable at best). Some vices are pretty addictive and probably shouldn't be widely available.

I wouldn't like to see crystal meth sold at gas stations, for example. *

Just to throw something out there (which I may or may not agree with), what if making a lesser vice illegal helps lower the attraction of other vices? Under this theory, someone thinks "Marijuana's illegal, and cigarettes aren't, so marijuana must be the more awesome drug! I'll go smoke it!" Were marijuana to be legal, they'd think "Marijuana and cigarettes are legal, and meth aren't, so meth must be the more awesome drug!"

The alternate theory, of course, is that they smoke marijuana and think "Wow, marijuana really isn't that bad, even though it's illegal. I bet meth isn't that bad either! Damn government, trying to keep us from having harmless fun!"

Oh absolutely, it would have to be highly controlled. But then, that's what legalisation is for. Theoretically, illegal dealers could just sell crystal meth out round the back of a truck stop anyway. Part of legalising it would require sellers to be licenced, just as they need to be with alcohol today. Naturally, those sort of places aren't the kind that we really want to be giving licences to (though for transit purposes one could argue they should be allowed to...since, well, alcohol is allowed). And education/support programs would need a heck of a lot of funding, all of which I suspect would come from the taxation of the products.

Prostitution can also be taxed - my aforementioned dominatrix friend submits her tax returns as any other sole proprietor does, and prostitution is subject to income tax where legalised like any other job.

edited 17th Jan '12 3:20:09 PM by CaissasDeathAngel

@Cassias: Honestly, after a bit of reflection...I can't really support legalization of certain drugs, meth and heroin being the two that spring immediately to mind. There's no real benefit (other than ending the illegal trade in both). Now, legalizing them for existing addicts (and producing them in laboratories) and treating the situation as a public health concern I do support; this approach was successful with alcoholism and it would be successful with harder drugs.

I just don't see a benefit in making highly illegal substances available to the general public. Of course, the same could be said of tobacco.

I do support the legalization of prostitution, having known sex workers and seen that half the problems that industry suffers from are created by society's attitudes toward it.

edited 17th Jan '12 3:29:13 PM by drunkscriblerian

Please, spell my name right, it's right there in front of you on the screen!

The benefits of removing the illegal trade are huge, especially consider what illegal drug money finances - I'm sure you'd rather it go towards things like healthcare, education and public services than gang warfare and the like. It also allows the supply to be controlled and improved, so you don't get things like brick dust and rat poison to bulk up pills and the like (the kind of thing that used to happen to bread, before regulation).

And of course, some of the money saved would go towards education and help programs to get people off the drugs.

@Caissas: That better? *

Anyhow, all that you say is true. I guess as far as meth goes its a personal thing; that drug destroyed the party scene in my hometown and I lost a lot of friends to it. As far as I've seen it turns people in to raging assholes, and I can't see a benefit in it being any more available than it already is.

My view is this. Case by case basis. It will depend entirely on the vice. Marijuanna legalize it regulate it. Psychadelics same thing. Things like Heroin, Meth, cocaine, crack, and other comparable substances either remain banned or tightly controlled.

Prostituion. Legalize it but with a few catches like regular check ups, black listing for anyone who develops an std. If it is one that can be cured and not transmitted they can come back after treatment. Mandatory use of condoms male or female. The street walking variety would be illegal still. Just too many dangers to it. Regulation of wages. Prostitutes get the lions share.

Legal versions of various drug houses that have to maintain certain health and cleanliness standards to reduce spread of disease. Better product controls etc. You could make quite a extensive industry out of legalizing and regulating the many vices.

I'm in favor of total legalization. A warning sign on the softer drugs without a physical addiction risk, and a free license for the ones that do have physical addiction risks. The body belongs to the brain occupying it and is free to use as such.

@Deboss: That's a laudable enough statement, and I'd agree with it...but again, I've seen what addiction to hard drugs does to people. If it was just the addict that suffered it would be one thing, but addicts betray friends and loved ones, commit crimes...sorry, but some things are just not a good idea.

As much as I want to believe in that kind of freedom, I just can't.

Alcohol does similar, and I see the effects of that most days, given I live in one of the most deprived and alcohol-soaked cities in the Western world. Obviously legalising something that's currently not isn't he same as the contrary, my thoughts on this are just that since the problem exists either way, it would be lesser and controllable if it were legal.

Alcohol prohibition didn't work, nor does it work for drugs. We're doing more for alcohol now though than we can for drugs, with quality control being huge (can you even imagine if that wasn't possible for booze?)

@Caissas: fair point; I guess we're of differing mindsets as to the definition of "legalization". What exactly are you proposing?

As I said above - basically, treat as with alcohol and tobacco. Tax massively, and plunge the money into education, support, quality control services, etc. Tobacco at least gives a net surplus to the country through taxation even after all of that - and the costs of treating smoking related diseases in our hospitals - so I envisage similar could be possible for drugs. Sellers would be licenced as they are for tobacco and alcohol, restrict it to minors, restrict it...places (outside for alcohol, inside for tobacco here essentially) as appropriate.

Obviously, counselling and support services exist now, but they could be completely revamped with all of that tax money, and the products would meet strict quality/control standards. No brick dust masquerading as coke, or rat poison bulking up the ecstasy pills, etc.

Studies have shown - don't have the time to find them right now, but Portugal is one I know off the top of my head - that use doesn't actually soar when this sort of thing is done, it increases at a measured rate, with the number of people getting help and treatment being what goes up a great deal.

edited 17th Jan '12 5:16:30 PM by CaissasDeathAngel

@Caissas: hmmm...I'll have to think about that one. Honestly not sure how I'd feel about it.

Still agree with you as to prostitution though.

Pick better friends. What they do with their own body is well within their rights, if you know somebody who has issues with controlling themselves over something, you do not trust them.

@Deboss: I guess this is where my experiences and yours differ. Mine is that drug addiction changes people, and not for the better.

Drugs: I'm for the decriminalization and regulation of drugs, much like tobacco and alcohol has right now. Some exceptions would include coca, which is a mild stimulant that's just a tad stronger than caffeine IIRC and therefore shouldn't be banned, and meth, which is problematic and has no redeeming benefit. Programs should raise awareness of the effects of drug overdose and rehabilitate addicts, and there should be incentive-based programs to prevent meth labs.

Also, if the Netherlands has shown anything through its legalization and regulation of marijuana, it doesn't correlate with a spike in drug use, as per capita use is actually higher in the United States than in the Netherlands. Also, we should get rid of the costly War on Drugs, which resulted in countless casualties, made profits for drug lords and cost a soberingly high amount of money.

Prostitution: Once again, for decriminalization and regulation. Like my point about drugs, there is no correlation with a spike in the practice with the relaxing of laws, and fighting it doesn't help the problem and gives rise to crime. There should also be safeguards in which those who would engage do so willingly and they're at least given the basic guarantees (decent living, etc).

Gambling: It's a matter of choice; the man has himself to blame for blowing wads of cash until running out. Regulation should be kept at a minimum.

edited 17th Jan '12 8:19:30 PM by EarlOfSandvich