There’s a front line in my back yard. (US-Mexico border)

[Footsore Rambler]

I have lived in southern Arizona for the past 21 years. And in the past 10, the border has gotten progressively uglier in many ways. The federal government cracked down on illegal traffic in urban areas starting in the mid 90’s. I think most people thought, not unreasonably, that that would reduce a lot of the drug trafficking and illegal immigration, because people would not be willing to cross the hostile deserts. They were wrong, though, and border crossing deaths doubled (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigrant_deaths_along_the_U.S.-Mexico_border) between 1995 and 2005, primarily due to exposure and dehydration. The Tucson border sector has seen 60 deaths so far this fiscal year. In addition, the remote routes are creating new sorts of bother in the US – people cutting fences on ranchlands, leaving garbage trails, and other stuff like that which is a bigger problem in rural area than urban ones.

In addition, drug trafficking violence is on the rise. We’ve all been hearing about this. This is a problem in the cities as well as the backcountry, and it affects everyone here – the local Americans, local Mexicans, illegal immigrants, and the tourist trade. I have seen many people who were in the process of illegally entering this country, but I am very lucky to have never seen drug traffickers. Every time I go into the backcountry, I have to accept that there is a nonzero chance I will become a victim of violence. In 2002, Park Ranger Kris Eggle was killed (http://www.nps.gov/orpi/historyculture/monument-timeline.htm)in Organ Pipe National Monument by drug traffickers.

So, I certainly understand that we need to do something about the border. However, what I hear at the national level seems completely alien to me. All of the focus seems to be on the people who successfully make it across and are now living in the US, and how they are somehow destroying our culture and bankrupting our hospitals. All of the border ‘security’ push, ever since 2001 seems to be focused, once again, on illegal immigrants, and not on drug trafficking. We want to build a big wall, and sort of maybe fund the Border Patrol, kind of, but definitely remove any pesky environmental regulations that might get in their way, and the Border Patrol is more than happy to let most of the cost for medical care of detained crossers fall to local emergency rooms (the Border Patrol sometimes declines to bring people into custody when it is clear that they need medical assistance, since the Feds would then be obligated to pay the bills for said assistance).

Here’s what I would like to see happen. First of all, the main border security emphasis needs to be on the drug trade. We need to stop that shit now. Raise my taxes, use that money to pay the Border Patrol to both hire more people and to make sure that they are not just warm bodies, but actually competent. A good Border Patrol agent needs to have all of the skills of a police officer plus many of the skills of a diplomat. This would be much better than the stupid wall everywhere, which costs perhaps slightly less money and causes many more problems for those of us who actually have to live on the border, and who like our neighboring Mexican cities and deserts, and aren’t thrilled by the loss of community that is occurring. Also, legalize drugs. A nation stoned off its collective ass (not that I think that would happen) is a better bet than people getting shot, raped, kidnapped, and exploited by the cartels. This is organized crime in the era of prohibition all over again.

Second, the culture fear is bullshit. I live in a part of the US that actually used to BE Mexico at some point, and I have lived alongside plenty of folks who came to this country illegally, and so I think I can say with some authority that people speaking Spanish in the grocery store will not lead to the end of American civilization. If it is, then you guys can kiss at least three and a half states goodbye – we were never American, by that definition. The biggest problem I have with illegal immigration is that people are killing themselves to get here. Dead bodies, in my opinion, trump trespassing. I’d like to see US immigration standards relaxed so that those folks can come here legally. They’re coming anyway – we might as well be better situated to keep tabs on who’s crossing. I think the economic considerations far outweigh any other factor for these folks, such that everyone who can try it does, and as such I doubt that widening the available legal routes would lead to even more people, especially if we were to be proactive about addressing the economic aspect in some way, such as enforcing laws that make it harder to hire undocumented workers.

Sorry about how long this is. I am a rambler, after all, and this is why I don’t usually post debates. Anyway, what are your thoughts? I know my viewpoint is biased, but I think it is a bias that has been missing in the public debate and I’m a bit sore about it. It's not abstract at all to me.

[KidVermicious]

Here’s what I would like to see happen. First of all, the main border security emphasis needs to be on the drug trade. We need to stop that shit now. Raise my taxes, use that money to pay the Border Patrol to both hire more people and to make sure that they are not just warm bodies, but actually competent. A good Border Patrol agent needs to have all of the skills of a police officer plus many of the skills of a diplomat. This would be much better than the stupid wall everywhere, which costs perhaps slightly less money and causes many more problems for those of us who actually have to live on the border, and who like our neighboring Mexican cities and deserts, and aren’t thrilled by the loss of community that is occurring. Also, legalize drugs. A nation stoned off its collective ass (not that I think that would happen) is a better bet than people getting shot, raped, kidnapped, and exploited by the cartels. This is organized crime in the era of prohibition all over again.

Legalise drugs. There's a lot else that needs to go with that, but for hecks sake, legalise drugs. That'd solve half our problems and a bunch of Mexico's too, right away.

Second, the culture fear is bullshit. I live in a part of the US that actually used to BE Mexico at some point, and I have lived alongside plenty of folks who came to this country illegally, and so I think I can say with some authority that people speaking Spanish in the grocery store will not lead to the end of American civilization. If it is, then you guys can kiss at least three and a half states goodbye – we were never American, by that definition. The biggest problem I have with illegal immigration is that people are killing themselves to get here. Dead bodies, in my opinion, trump trespassing. I’d like to see US immigration standards relaxed so that those folks can come here legally. They’re coming anyway – we might as well be better situated to keep tabs on who’s crossing. I think the economic considerations far outweigh any other factor for these folks, such that everyone who can try it does, and as such I doubt that widening the available legal routes would lead to even more people, especially if we were to be proactive about addressing the economic aspect in some way, such as enforcing laws that make it harder to hire undocumented workers.

The culture fear is the same one that's accompanied every single wave of immigration to this country, near as I can tell. While it's unfounded, you aren't going to get rid of it either. There are two differences... one, this wave doesn't look to stop any time soon. The other, large percentages (anybody got a number?) of this wave are illegal. Both those factors will slow down assimilation and adjustment, but I don't think they're enough to stop it.

But, yeah. Kill the drug trade, then fix our immigration policies so that individuals that want to come here and work can, and I think 90% of the problem goes away. And probably helps Mexico in the process.

[Seeker of Truth & Beauty]

I agree. Legalizing drugs would solve a whole bunch of problems. Then we can see what issues are left, and deal with them on their own merit.

[Muskrat Love]

The best solution to the drug trade is to legalize drugs, but that doesn't seem likely to happen anytime soon.

In the meantime, we need a way to differentiate the drug smugglers for the illegal immigrants who are coming for work, so we can focus our energies on the smugglers. My idea? Stop trying to catch the immigrants who are coming for work on the way over. Change the focus on busting their employers and sending them back at that point, and accept that they are going to find their way across. Now, I have an idea that sounds weird but would definitely help isolate the smugglers - set up stations in the border areas where crossing is frequent that are manned by a few law enforcement guys and some drug dogs. Set up some bright lights and a tall flagpole so they can be seen for miles around, and let it be known that if you go there and consent to having some drug sniffing dogs check them out for drugs, you will be given water, food, and a map to the nearest civilization. Immigrants will be let known that they may face deportation if they are caught working illegally, but as long as they don't have drugs on them, they don't have to worry about the border patrol. You might even be able to get some informants - offer a temporary work visa to anyone who provides information leading to the arrest of a drug smuggler.

Then, the border patrol can focus on people avoiding the border stations and people avoiding patrols. If they see someone crossing the desert, they can go meet them, search them for drugs, and then point them to the nearest water and food station. If they run, then you know they aren't just looking for work.

[KidVermicious]

Interesting article on CNN today about Vincente Fox coming out in favor of legalising marijuana.

[Footsore Rambler]

Then, the border patrol can focus on people avoiding the border stations and people avoiding patrols. If they see someone crossing the desert, they can go meet them, search them for drugs, and then point them to the nearest water and food station. If they run, then you know they aren't just looking for work.

The biggest problem I see with this idea is that when people decide to cross the desert, they employ the services of a coyote who (supposedly) knows the territory and can make arrangements on the other side. And the sort of people who have good back-and-forth networks across the border are probably involved in the drug trade as well. So a coyote is unlikely to lead them to such a station, and they would be extremely unlikely to find it themselves.

Also, that brings up another point: organized crime profits from both the drug trade and the people trade, so focusing on making it harder to cross only adds to their profit, as people become more reliant upon professional help. Going after the organization makes much more sense from a border safety perspective.

ETA: I misread your idea somewhat. I still think it won't work, though. For one thing, people do not know what to believe about the Border Patrol, because they hear lies (and some unfortunate truths) about mistreatment and cruelty. So it's not reasonable to expect people not to run.

[Clothahump]

The best solution to the drug trade is to legalize drugs, but that doesn't seem likely to happen anytime soon.
By that reasoning, the best solution to the increasing homicide rate is to legalize homicide, and the best solution to the increasing theft rate is to legalize theft.

I take a hard line. Build the fence, monitor it electronically and back that monitoring up with armed response to shoot people trying to come over, under, around or through it.

[Muskrat Love]

By that reasoning, the best solution to the increasing homicide rate is to legalize homicide, and the best solution to the increasing theft rate is to legalize theft.


Bad analogy. Murder and theft by their very nature harm other people. If you made them legal, more people would be getting murdered and stolen from.

Selling drugs only directly harms the people who choose to use the drugs. It indirectly harms the people selling them and people who come in contact with the sellers of illegal drugs only because it is illegal. If the drug trade were legal and regulated, the drug dealers would be put out of business and drugs would be sold by new and existing legitimate businesses, generating jobs and tax revenue. The only people being harmed would be the people using the drugs, and the harm to them would be lesser because they would be receiving a safer product and they would not have to spend so much money to get them.

We have millions of people addicted to legal drugs in this country, yet crime related to that is uncommon compared to crime related to illegal drug addiction. Yes, people sometimes rob others for cigarette or alcohol money. Making cigarettes or alcohol illegal would do nothing to reduce those kinds of crimes, but would generate a lot of money for people who would be willing to circumvent the law to provide cigarettes and alcohol to those addicted to them. Millions of people die because of drinking and smoking, and those numbers might be reduced somewhat if they were made illegal, but the drawbacks would outweigh the benefits.

We have examples of countries that have legalized or decriminalized many drugs that are illegal here, and they do not seem to be suffering in any way from doing so. When we decriminalized alcohol in the USA, this greatly reduced the number of killings related to organized crime. If we legalized recreational drugs in this country, the drug cartels would be put out of business because they would not be able to compete with the corporations who would start selling.

[Ichigodaisuki]

For those posting to legalise drugs, which drugs are you referring to?
All illegal drugs?
Narcotics? Depressants? Stimulants? Hallucinogens? Cannabis? Steroids?

[Muskrat Love]

For those posting to legalise drugs, which drugs are you referring to?
All illegal drugs?
Narcotics? Depressants? Stimulants? Hallucinogens? Cannabis? Steroids?

I believe that they should all be legalized, with varying degrees of regulation. Some should be no harder to buy than cigarettes, some should only be dispensed under carefully controlled conditions.

[L. G. Butts, Ph.D.]

By that reasoning, the best solution to the increasing homicide rate is to legalize homicide, and the best solution to the increasing theft rate is to legalize theft.

I take a hard line. Build the fence, monitor it electronically and back that monitoring up with armed response to shoot people trying to come over, under, around or through it.

Serious question here Clothahump: why are conservatives against legalizing drugs? Unlike homicide and theft, drug usage is a victim-less crime. Why do you care if I drink/smoke/inject myself into oblivion in my own house with chemicals I bought completely voluntarily from someone who sold them to me voluntarily with money I made using my own talents and hard work? Why is it the governments business what I do on my property with my property if I am not harming anybody else? What is the basis of your desire to have drugs remain illegal?

[Footsore Rambler]

By that reasoning, the best solution to the increasing homicide rate is to legalize homicide, and the best solution to the increasing theft rate is to legalize theft.


Do you feel that repealing prohibition was a mistake then? I see that as much more analogous than your example above.

ETA: if you want the wall with the monitoring, etc, you will have to figure out how to pay for it. It will either require an order of magnitude increase in funding or else (like the current situation) a half-assed implementation that does more harm than good.

[Nava]

Do you feel that repealing prohibition was a mistake then? I see that as much more analogous than your example above.

And to make it illegal to smoke.

I would also like to know how would people who find themselves in the situation of "I entered the country legally, got a work permit legally, filed all my paperwork to keep the permit but the Government is taking a long time to answer" be dealt with, in both scenarios. What could be done so immigrants (legal and not) learn to trust the Government, rather than fear it? What can be done so immigrants who find themselves abused by their employers will know who to call and be willing to do it?

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

Serious question here Clothahump: why are conservatives against legalizing drugs? Unlike homicide and theft, drug usage is a victim-less crime. Why do you care if I drink/smoke/inject myself into oblivion in my own house with chemicals I bought completely voluntarily from someone who sold them to me voluntarily with money I made using my own talents and hard work? Why is it the governments business what I do on my property with my property if I am not harming anybody else? What is the basis of your desire to have drugs remain illegal?

On the surface, I wouldn't care. But what if you're talking about heroin, you become utterly addicted, lose your job, and have to resort to robbing people in order to get the money you need to get your fix? That is no longer victimless. Also even if you are able to continually support your habit, you are inflicting some sort of distress on your loved ones, if you have any.

I am in favor of legalizing marijuana and hallucinogenics only, which would unload a huge burden on the prison system as well as opening up revenue streams for government taxation and eradicating profits from cartels.

Cocaine, heroin, meth...these things need to be stamped out with a vengeance. Those worthless drugs are the scourge of mankind, leaving countless dead bodies and addicted persons in their wake. I cannot think of a justifiable reason to legalize these drugs as that would send a message that it's OK to abuse them. It isn't.

[L. G. Butts, Ph.D.]

On the surface, I wouldn't care. But what if you're talking about heroin, you become utterly addicted, lose your job, and have to resort to robbing people in order to get the money you need to get your fix? That is no longer victimless. Also even if you are able to continually support your habit, you are inflicting some sort of distress on your loved ones, if you have any.I think this logic is twisted. Bear with me, I am tired and going to bed, but I wanted to reply...

First off, doing heroin is a victimless crime. Robbery is not. We have laws against robbery and we should enforce them and punish robbers, but peaceful drug users should be left alone. It shouldn't matter what the motivation for the robbery is...

The logic you are promoting is similar to what is used to make guns illegal. After all, robbers and other criminals use guns to commit crime, so lets make guns illegal... Robbers commit crime to get heroin, lets make heroin illegal... I don't own a gun, but I find this kind of reasoning disingenuous, I think most criminals would commit crime whether or not they have a gun or want heroin.

Finally, I could easily extend your argument to poor people and make being poor illegal. After all, when you are poor, you get hungry, and if you can't afford food you will resort to robbing people in order to get the money you need to eat. Right? How is this different?
I am in favor of legalizing marijuana and hallucinogenics only, which would unload a huge burden on the prison system as well as opening up revenue streams for government taxation and eradicating profits from cartels.

Cocaine, heroin, meth...these things need to be stamped out with a vengeance. Those worthless drugs are the scourge of mankind, leaving countless dead bodies and addicted persons in their wake. I cannot think of a justifiable reason to legalize these drugs as that would send a message that it's OK to abuse them. It isn't.I have a problem drawing a bright line between the drug classifications. For instance, you state heroin is evil and should be made illegal, but what about morphine, codeine, and oxycotin. If my understanding is correct, all these drugs are very similar in their properties. Do you agree? Meh, this is a whole different argument...

When it comes down to it, I just think that criminalization is a crappy way to control the use of illegal substances. One only need to look a prohibition and the current war on drugs to see that. Make everything legal, tax it, and use the money for education to wipe out the drugs you dislike. Hell, wipe out all of them, I don't care. I just think the government has no business telling me what I can do to my body.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

Well, the funny thing is, I am quite pro-gun (while I don't own one...small boys and all, too chancy). I agree that independent of one another, robbery and heroin use are very different (while both illegal).

But it's been shown time and again that junkies will do just about anything to get their fix, which includes committing crimes, so if one leads to the other, how is it not logical to conclude that particular instances of drug abuse can and often do lead to criminal activity (the actual drug abuse aside)?

Hey, in a perfect world, I'm with you, all drugs are legal, no one ever gets hurt or addicted.

I also agree with you that it will be challenging to discriminate which drugs should and shouldn't be illegal, especially in the case of opioids, and possibly cocaine, derivatives of which have legitimate medical uses. Heroin, IIRC, has ZERO legitimate uses as medicine.

[Muskrat Love]

Well, the funny thing is, I am quite pro-gun (while I don't own one...small boys and all, too chancy). I agree that independent of one another, robbery and heroin use are very different (while both illegal).

But it's been shown time and again that junkies will do just about anything to get their fix, which includes committing crimes, so if one leads to the other, how is it not logical to conclude that particular instances of drug abuse can and often do lead to criminal activity (the actual drug abuse aside)?

Hey, in a perfect world, I'm with you, all drugs are legal, no one ever gets hurt or addicted.

I also agree with you that it will be challenging to discriminate which drugs should and shouldn't be illegal, especially in the case of opioids, and possibly cocaine, derivatives of which have legitimate medical uses. Heroin, IIRC, has ZERO legitimate uses as medicine.

A heroin addict turns to robbery because heroin is so expensive. It's so expensive because of all the expenses of maintaining a black market supply line and the huge markups dealers add to make the risk worthwhile. If you need to spend $200 a day to keep from being in the agony of heroin withdrawal, yes, that will lead to crime.

Heroin is not expensive to produce, though. If it cost your typical heroin addict $10 a day to feed his addiction instead of $200, he could easily support his habit by panhandling or mooching off of family and friends, if he couldn't get a job. It would not cure the problem of addiction, but it would make heroin addicts more like alcoholics, except they'd be more functional and a lot healthier.

[Muskrat Love]

By the way, long term heroin addicts don't get much of a high from heroin - they just get escape from the cravings and withdrawal symptoms. Pure heroin also does not cause much in the way of health problems, it's the withdrawal, impurities, and overdoses that kill people. It would be entirely possible for a heroin addict to hold down a job and provide for a family, if heroin wasn't insanely expensive and came in a form that was consistent in quality.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

By the way, long term heroin addicts don't get much of a high from heroin - they just get escape from the cravings and withdrawal symptoms. Pure heroin also does not cause much in the way of health problems, it's the withdrawal, impurities, and overdoses that kill people. It would be entirely possible for a heroin addict to hold down a job and provide for a family, if heroin wasn't insanely expensive and came in a form that was consistent in quality.

Well, perhaps heroin is a bad example. What about cocaine and meth, though? Even if they were affordable as you say under legalization, the long term effects of heavy use are devastating, especially meth. Tweakers can be some outright batshit crazy, paranoid mofo's. No telling what they will do.

[Muskrat Love]

Well, perhaps heroin is a bad example. What about cocaine and meth, though? Even if they were affordable as you say under legalization, the long term effects of heavy use are devastating, especially meth. Tweakers can be some outright batshit crazy, paranoid mofo's. No telling what they will do.

For decades methamphetamines were readily available by prescription, and many people lived their lives on a permanent meth high. My grandmother was addicted to amphetamines for decades, and she was eccentric, but not your typical stereotypical tweaker. If legalized and controlled, there would be people who still over-used the drug and would suffer from the mental issues that caused, but those people are already out there anyway, and their craziness is compounded by the fact that they have to spend hundreds a day to stay crazy. There would also be people who are occasional users or people who use relatively low levels and maintain a fairly normal life.

Most illegal drugs have negative stereotypes forced on their users by the fringe of extreme addicts. I used meth for a while years ago, and though it did lead to me making some decisions that were dumb in hindsight and cause me to spend a lot more money than I should have on drugs, I never got to the "tweaker" stage, nor did I end up with a $100 a day addiction (I probably spent about $40-$60 a week on it). I knew a lot of people who had jobs and seemed normal, you'd never know that they were using meth on a regular basis. Many were very successful and attributed their success to the energy they got from the drug. I also knew the psychos, the main one being a person who was already unbalanced and violent and had access to large quantities because they were a dealer. I think the majority of the drugs were being used by people who were not that negatively impacted by the drugs use, and the main negative impact was economic.

As with all illegal drugs, there are people who use in moderation and who lead normal lives, and people who are immoderate and have drugs ruin their lives. Making the drugs illegal does not cause the immoderate to stop using - nothing other than being locked away will stop them, making it harder to get will just cause them to go to more desperate lengths to get it. Criminalization does probably discourage some people from using, but mostly it just makes it more expensive and dangerous for those who never would go the batshit insane route. Yes, there are people who start out using in moderation and after a long time progress to overuse, but if it was legal, it would be easier for these people to get help. If Joe Blow who had a $5 legal speed habit starts spending $25 a day on it and starts losing it because of the amounts he's taking, the fact that he doesn't have to worry about going to jail will make it easier for people to persuade him to seek help. And if he still doesn't seek help, at least he won't be spending hundreds a day on his habit, he can self-destruct without wrecking the lives of others.

[Footsore Rambler]

Here's an excerpt from a forwarded email I just got:

This is a short recap about the incident yesterday in <snip> during which two of our employees <snip> along with a Pima County employee <snip> came under gun fire from what appeared to be drug traffickers from south of the border.

<specific details snipped -- basically, no one was injured and the Border Patrol was called in>

Subsequently, and unfortunately, the suspects were able to evade the search party, however SO as the lead for the investigation, did recover several fresh shot 9mm casings from the area where the initial shot likely came from, indicating that subsequent shots may have been fired at our people as they were getting out of the area.

<snip>


We got this email because we are frequently in remote areas near the border for our work, and now there is a question as to whether we will be able to do the work we need to do and still remain safe. For one thing, we have to start visiting those sites in pairs rather than alone, which means there are fewer people available at any time to do the same amount of field work. We will probably end up cutting back on some of the site visits due to scheduling, and that means that we are getting less data. It's frustrating. Not to mention the possibility of getting shot at.

[Footsore Rambler]

Well, perhaps heroin is a bad example. What about cocaine and meth, though? Even if they were affordable as you say under legalization, the long term effects of heavy use are devastating, especially meth. Tweakers can be some outright batshit crazy, paranoid mofo's. No telling what they will do.

I agree, but if we want to talk about mood altering drugs that can make people crazy, unpredictable, and dangerous to others, we need to include alcohol. Although I suppose one of the biggest differences is that it is less addictive, and so more people can partake in a controlled fashion. I don't know.

My point is this: drug traffickers can be some outright batshit crazy, paranoid mofo's. No telling what they will do. And I think it would be a trade up for me, personally, to worry about batshit crazy tweakers instead. I'm not sure if that applies to the nation as a whole, since most people aren't in the thick of the problem, but it has to be an element of the tradeoff.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

I agree, but if we want to talk about mood altering drugs that can make people crazy, unpredictable, and dangerous to others, we need to include alcohol. Although I suppose one of the biggest differences is that it is less addictive, and so more people can partake in a controlled fashion. I don't know.

My point is this: drug traffickers can be some outright batshit crazy, paranoid mofo's. No telling what they will do. And I think it would be a trade up for me, personally, to worry about batshit crazy tweakers instead. I'm not sure if that applies to the nation as a whole, since most people aren't in the thick of the problem, but it has to be an element of the tradeoff.

My only argument FOR alcohol is intent. You CAN have a drink or two of wine, beer, whiskey, etc and be a perfectly functioning member of society. There isn't the same INTENT wrt illegal drug abuse. Who takes ONE hit off a joint and says "I'm good"? What cocaine user does "just enough" to keep them from feening for a three-day binge? Heroin? Meth? The answer is always MORE, MORE, MORE!

Not that it matters much. I agree in part with Badz Maru (or whatever his name is) that there are arguments to and fro. Marijuana is the easy sticking point though. It should be legal. We should start there and see what progresses.

[Muskrat Love]

My only argument FOR alcohol is intent. You CAN have a drink or two of wine, beer, whiskey, etc and be a perfectly functioning member of society. There isn't the same INTENT wrt illegal drug abuse. Who takes ONE hit off a joint and says "I'm good"? What cocaine user does "just enough" to keep them from feening for a three-day binge? Heroin? Meth? The answer is always MORE, MORE, MORE!


*raises hand*

There were many times where I did illegal drugs in moderation. Now, I was never the kind of person who would take one hit off a joint and be good (I had a high tolerance), and because of that there were many times I would pass on taking a hit at all when it was one joint shared between 4 or more people - there was no point in my sharing. But I would say most marijuana losers don't "binge smoke". Many times I would load a bowl on my bong and not finish it because I knew I had enough. I wasn't as stoned as I possibly could, but I was at a level that I wanted to be.

Likewise, when I did hard drugs, I did not overuse often. As mentioned before, I used meth for a while and I did not do huge amounts. I would make a half gram last all week. I'd do a little line in the morning, and maybe some more when I got home (but not always), but I didn't do any later in the evening because I knew it would keep me up all night.

I had a friend in my early 20s who would buy an eight ball of cocaine with every paycheck, which was every other week. We'd party with it over the weekend, using about half of it, and then she would save the rest and wouldn't run out until it was almost time for her next paycheck.

I've never messed with heroin or been close to a heroin addict, but from what I've read and heard, long-time addicts use just enough to keep from getting withdrawal most of the time, and regulate their use much better than most alcoholics regulate their drinking.

I don't think you've hung out with many drug users. This idea of drug addicts who use and use and use until they are out and then go get some more only applies to a very few. In my opinion, illegal drug users are generally pretty careful about scheduling their use to make sure they don't run out (sometimes annoyingly so when you want them to share). Of course, these careful, controlled users are the ones who don't draw much attention to themselves, because you probably don't know they use drugs. For a long time when I was in the drug scene, I would frequently be surprised to find out who did drugs.

[Iris]

I am in favor of regulated, taxed legalization. However, there is one way that the illegal drugs differ from the legal ones, and FoieGrasIsEvil almost hit on it.

When you drink wine or other alcohols, your purpose is usually not to get drunk. You drink it for the taste. That is not true of any illegal drug (that I know of). Your purpose in using meth, cocaine, heroine, pot, whatever is to get high.

Of course, there are a lot of people who drink to get drunk, but that is not the only use for alcohol. There is only one use for recreational drugs.

[Muskrat Love]

I am in favor of regulated, taxed legalization. However, there is one way that the illegal drugs differ from the legal ones, and FoieGrasIsEvil almost hit on it.

When you drink wine or other alcohols, your purpose is usually not to get drunk. You drink it for the taste. That is not true of any illegal drug (that I know of). Your purpose in using meth, cocaine, heroine, pot, whatever is to get high.

Of course, there are a lot of people who drink to get drunk, but that is not the only use for alcohol. There is only one use for recreational drugs.

I don't think most people drink with the intention of getting drunk, but I don't think the primary motivation is taste, otherwise non-alcoholic beer and virgin drinks would be a lot more popular. For most people, having a drink or two won't make them drunk or impair them in a significant way, but it makes them feel a bit more relaxed. Likewise, sometimes people use small amounts of drugs for a light buzz or a little pick-me up.

[L. G. Butts, Ph.D.]

My only argument FOR alcohol is intent. You CAN have a drink or two of wine, beer, whiskey, etc and be a perfectly functioning member of society. There isn't the same INTENT wrt illegal drug abuse. Who takes ONE hit off a joint and says "I'm good"? What cocaine user does "just enough" to keep them from feening for a three-day binge? Heroin? Meth? The answer is always MORE, MORE, MORE!

Not that it matters much. I agree in part with Badz Maru (or whatever his name is) that there are arguments to and fro. Marijuana is the easy sticking point though. It should be legal. We should start there and see what progresses.Gotta disagree with you here, I think you are way off base. I do not use drugs anymore, though I did partake of just about everything in my youth. With regards to marijuana, I would regularly take a hit or two and say "I'm good". Same with crystal meth, which I did pretty regularly for about a year. Same with acid and shrooms. Getting totally baked on drugs is just about as much fun and has many of the same ramifications as getting completely drunk. You get really messed up and then you pay for it and it sucks and you feel like crap. Every once in a while I will get drunk, maybe once every other year or so, but in the main I just want to have a glass or two of wine to take the edge off the day. I think the majority of drug users (at least the drug users that have been around a while, hell ever seen teenagers get their hands on alcohol?) take this approach. The people that I know who smoke pot (all late 30s to mid 40s) are regular drug users who use with moderation.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

Gotta disagree with you here, I think you are way off base. I do not use drugs anymore, though I did partake of just about everything in my youth. With regards to marijuana, I would regularly take a hit or two and say "I'm good". Same with crystal meth, which I did pretty regularly for about a year. Same with acid and shrooms. Getting totally baked on drugs is just about as much fun and has many of the same ramifications as getting completely drunk. You get really messed up and then you pay for it and it sucks and you feel like crap. Every once in a while I will get drunk, maybe once every other year or so, but in the main I just want to have a glass or two of wine to take the edge off the day. I think the majority of drug users (at least the drug users that have been around a while, hell ever seen teenagers get their hands on alcohol?) take this approach. The people that I know who smoke pot (all late 30s to mid 40s) are regular drug users who use with moderation.

Everyone that I knew, including myself, when we were all abusing blow and meth, would use it and use it until it was gone, then we would fall into the "where do we get more" trap over and over again.

My experiences with those two drugs were particularly bad and addictive. Maybe it was just me and those I associated with that were the outliers.

[L. G. Butts, Ph.D.]

Everyone that I knew, including myself, when we were all abusing blow and meth, would use it and use it until it was gone, then we would fall into the "where do we get more" trap over and over again.

My experiences with those two drugs were particularly bad and addictive. Maybe it was just me and those I associated with that were the outliers.How old were you? I saw the same behavior when I was in my teens and early twenties, both with drugs and alcohol. But by the time drug users are in their mid to late twenties I believe this type of behavior fades. YMMV.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

How old were you? I saw the same behavior when I was in my teens and early twenties, both with drugs and alcohol. But by the time drug users are in their mid to late twenties I believe this type of behavior fades. YMMV.

Shamefully, my mid-twenties, as you predicted.

Having children and getting married and serious about life tends to change a fella. Sometimes.