# Heroin legalization, why the same tired objections? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [October 26, 2013, 11:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heroin-legalization-why-the-same-tired-objections/672300 "2013-10-26T11:38:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![blindboyard](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blindboyard/32/2833_2.png) [@blindboyard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blindboyard)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2013, 8:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heroin-legalization-why-the-same-tired-objections/672300/41 "2013-10-27T08:33:50Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > So heroin became a big problem after it became illegal. And this is an argument for keeping it illegal? You know, before it was illegal it was a heavily marketed pharmaceutical product, presribed in place of morphine because it was claimed to be less addictive and also used to treat things like the common cold and asthma. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2013, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heroin-legalization-why-the-same-tired-objections/672300/42 "2013-10-27T14:12:58Z")
> [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](#): > > No, because there are comparatively few people that would be interested. > > Even if a bunch of people tried it (which I doubt) many people try smoking, drinking, grass etc. without going back to it because they didn’t like the effect. > > As the drugs get more potent the number of people willing to try them diminishes. From that diminishing population the majority would try once and never again. Of those that repeated the exposure the majority of \*_them_ would be occasional users. Of those occasional users a small group would develop a habit. > > How many tea-totallers do you know? How many casual drinkers? How many heavy - but not problem - drinkers? How many drunks? I’d bet it follows a pretty basic bell curve. Really all I’m asking here is how many more people would use heroin if it were legal? Basic economics says when things are cheaper, people use more of them. When the quality goes up, so do the number of sales. When something is hard and risky to get - for example, when getting it might get you ripped off, or mugged, or arested - you’re going to sell less than when you can pick up some heroin along with a Big Gulp at 7-11. I mean, we don’t _know,_ I guess, because you _can’t_ pick up a bag of heroin at 7-11. But given the number of people who do legal drugs, like alcohol and nicotine, it seems to me that the number of heroin users would sky-rocket, if it were legal. And where did you get the idea that people prefer _less_ potent drugs over more potent ones? Do you go to your dealer and ask for the weakest-ass Mexican ditch weed he’s got? I mean, maybe legal heroin is is a good idea. The purpose of life is to be happy, and maybe the sum total of happiness would go up if more people used more heroin. But if you can’t agree the sales of heroin would go up, a lot, of it were safe, cheap and legal, it seems like there’s a fundamental problem here - like you’re not interested in talking about what the actual practical real world effects would be. ---
**Author:** ![Zeke\_N.Destroi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/4af34b/32.png) [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeke_N.Destroi)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2013, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heroin-legalization-why-the-same-tired-objections/672300/43 "2013-10-27T15:12:47Z")
**Linus** And I’m just saying that I don’t think would skyrocket simply because heron is not, to the vast majority of people, something terribly attractive. I can’t know whether it would be come significantly more attractive if legalized but I don’t suspect it would. Admittedly this is pure conjecture. As to more vs less potent drugs I made a poor choice of words there. I did not mean that potheads - for instance - want weaker grass than stronger. In referring to potency I meant the relative potency of different drugs (in this case pot vs heroin.) My bad, your interpretation and befuddlement is completely understandable and I apologize for the sloppy diction. **Zoid** I haven’t forgotten about you, please be patient for a little longer. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2013, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heroin-legalization-why-the-same-tired-objections/672300/44 "2013-10-27T15:38:19Z")
> [@blindboyard](#): > > Solution: summarily murder them all. > > The fact is, prohibition makes all the effects of heroin addiction worse. > > Once upon a time heroin was given on prescription to addicts. Even now most healthcare systems give methodone out to addicts, which normally results in the patient becoming addicted to both, or refusing to take methodone because it doesn’t feel the same. > > So we’re back to the circular arguments and nonsense. Legalisation is the worse of all systems, except for all the others. There is no circular argument. Prohibition doesn’t make addiction better or worse. Addiction is independent of it’s legality. The drug destroys a person’s ability to function in society and makes them dependent on others. ---
**Author:** ![zoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zoid/32/336_2.png) [@zoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zoid)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2013, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heroin-legalization-why-the-same-tired-objections/672300/45 "2013-10-27T16:07:04Z")
> [@blindboyard](#): > > He asked for negative effects other than addiction itself which don’t result from persecution and prohibition. You have failed in this. The negative effects in those links are infection, disease and poisoning by cutting agents, all of which are a result of prohibition. And, of course, addiction and withdrawal. They mention decreased kidney function on the wiki but state it isn’t known whether it is caused by cutting agents or disease, which I suppose might mean it could just be an effect of heroin use itself. Apart from that, you got nutting. No he did not. He did not rule out negative affects of addiction. Addiction is the primary negative affect. You have failed in your simple minded analysis. Perhaps it’s the heroin? ---
**Author:** ![zoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zoid/32/336_2.png) [@zoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zoid)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2013, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heroin-legalization-why-the-same-tired-objections/672300/46 "2013-10-27T16:21:34Z")
> [@blindboyard](#): > > You know, before it was illegal it was a heavily marketed pharmaceutical product, presribed in place of morphine because it was claimed to be less addictive and also used to treat things like the common cold and asthma. So the fact that we were once ignorant is your best case for making it legal now?! ---
**Author:** ![Zeke\_N.Destroi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/4af34b/32.png) [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeke_N.Destroi)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2013, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heroin-legalization-why-the-same-tired-objections/672300/47 "2013-10-27T18:09:12Z")
Hoo boy, grab a beer and a burger folks, this will be a long (and I suspect ultimately fruitless) one. > [@zoid](#): > > Just to be clear, are you stating that withdrawal from cigarettes is equivalent to heroin with drawl and can be fatal? No one said that withdrawl from cigarettes can be fatal (except to those near the one niccing out). Multiple studies have shown that the addiction to nicotine can be as strong or stronger than that of heroin. Try reading for comprehension sometime (it helps if you remove the bias blinders). > [@zoid](#): > > I can kind of see DrCube’s point that personal responsibility and rights should trump moral or even practical issues. > **But to argue that heroin isn’t addictive and doesn’t harm the users** is just about the most asinine thing ever posted on the internet. \*\*Only a fucking moron would make this claim \*\*when the vast preponderance of evidence opposes it. “…vast preponderance of evidence…” I do think these words mean what you think they mean. I fact I do not think a lot of words mean what you think they mean. There is a wealth of evidence that heroin is largely harmless in and of itself - that is to say that the drug itself does not appear to harm the body systems. The adulterants added to it (cutting agents) are what cause the damage. No one claimed that it isn’t addictive. In fact the addictive qualities have been accepted explicitly and implicitly by EVERYONE in the thread. So since you’ve established that only a “fucking moron” would make that argument what specific type of moron invents the claims that he in turn mocks. I will point out though that [your own cite](http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/heroin-abuse-addiction/what-are-long-term-effects-heroin-use) says, “At some point during continuous heroin use, a person can become addicted to the drug.” Note the use of the word _can_ as opposed to _will_. > [@zoid](#): > > [What are the long-term effects of heroin use? | National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)](http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/heroin-abuse-addiction/what-are-long-term-effects-heroin-use) > [Heroin - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin#Adverse_effects) Unfortunately I can’t get the page on medical complication of heroin from [drugabuse.gov](http://drugabuse.gov) to load. I will grant that abscesses, infection and collapsed veins can be a direct result of injection but safe-injection sites and other such measures would minimize those significantly. > [@](#): > > [Alcohol, Benzos, and Opiates—Withdrawal That Might Kill You | Psychology Today](http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-addiction/201001/alcohol-benzos-and-opiates-withdrawal-might-kill-you) “… in most cases, withdrawal from many opiates is **not deadly**. Still there are some very important exceptions. **Methadone** , a long-acting opiate often prescribed as a replacement for heroin can cause death during withdrawal **if it’s consumed in high enough doses for a long enough period**.” emphasis mine Note that the only example given for a potentially lethal withdrawl is methadone. It does not say that heroin is one of the exceptions - though I grant you it doesn’t say it isn’t. From [drugabuse.gov](http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/heroin-abuse-addiction/what-are-long-term-effects-heroin-use) “Heroin withdrawal is never fatal to otherwise healthy adults.” Note the use of the word NEVER. Do you read your own cites? Or anyone else’s? Or at all? > [@](#): > > I never said that. This is regards to my asking for a cite that cigarettes are not physically addictive. You did say it, and I’ve shown it in a previous post. Funny how you have yet to back-up your statement or back-down from it since you definitely did make it. See, I actually read what people say. Try it sometime; it’s fun 😃 > [@](#): > > You really can’t read can you. Go back and check what I wrote, From you this is white-hot irony. > [@](#): > > I just gave you some citations. All of which refute the claims that you were trying to back up. Thanks for that. > [@zoid](#): > > The problem is that it does harm others because the rest of us will inevitably end of taking care of the junkies because we have too much empathy to step over their stupid asses until they become bloated corpses. Again, their dependence on others is largely tied to the ugly realities of life as an addict under the zero-tolerance model. Please feel free to read about the effect harm reduction has had in the countries in which it has been / is still being used. > [@Magiver](#): > > There is no circular argument. Prohibition doesn’t make addiction better or worse. Addiction is independent of it’s legality. The drug destroys a person’s ability to function in society and makes them dependent on others. Again, it is not the drug or addiction that do these things it is the issues peripheral to the addiction/drug caused by the prosecution of the war on drugs. > [@zoid](#): > > No he did not. He did not rule out negative affects of addiction. Addiction is the primary negative affect. You have failed in your simple minded analysis. Perhaps it’s the heroin? Nope, actually that is what I said, perhaps not clearly enough for you, and what I have been saying throughout. The addiction itself does not preclude contributive functioning. Everything surrounding it does. > [@zoid](#): > > So the fact that we were once ignorant is your best case for making it legal now?! Which means that your best argument boils down to “we are still ignorant and damned if I’ll give it up without a fight.” So without stooping to calling you a “fucking moron” or insisting that you are “oversimplifying” - both of which would be rude and counter-productive - I’ll just refer you to a [cite I’m sure you’ll find useful and rewarding](http://www.starfall.com/). Zeke ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2013, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heroin-legalization-why-the-same-tired-objections/672300/48 "2013-10-28T14:13:38Z")
> [@Zeke\_N.Destroi](#): > > Again, their dependence on others is largely tied to the ugly realities of life as an addict under the zero-tolerance model. Please feel free to read about the effect harm reduction has had in the countries in which it has been / is still being used. > > Again, it is not the drug or addiction that do these things it is the issues peripheral to the addiction/drug caused by the prosecution of the war on drugs. Bullshit. The inability to function is a direct result of the use of the drug. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2013, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heroin-legalization-why-the-same-tired-objections/672300/49 "2013-10-28T14:42:58Z")
For me, this whole retarded discussion boils down to this: Let’s say alcohol did not cause liver problems or manifest any other kind of physical ailments. Would alcoholism be harmless? No, of course not. Alcoholism, along with its cousins of other substance abuse and addiction, have enormous impacts on personal and social relationships. For example, parents who get intoxicated frequently are pretty much by definition neglecting their children, which has real impacts on their development. Addicts lie, cheat and steal not because of the cost of drugs, but because of what the disease of addiction consists of. You can take the richest alcoholic or addict in the world, who can feed his or her demons into perpetuity, and I guarantee you that such a person is still a messed up asshole who leaves every relationship they have ever had in flaming wreckage – and that is not a function of prohibition or the price of drugs. The idea that addiction is not an illness unless is manifests in damage to one’s organs is patently bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2013, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heroin-legalization-why-the-same-tired-objections/672300/50 "2013-10-28T18:18:12Z")
Being arrested and imprisoned has a negative impact on a person’s life as well. So to me the question is finding the balance. Is the increased harm done to drug users by the criminalization of drugs justified by a reduced usage of drugs? If criminalization reduces the number of addicts by a thousand people but sends five thousand people to prison, then society would be better off allowing the legal use of drugs - the drugs are hurting fewer people that the criminalization is. The same argument can be made with the economic issues. Drug addicts do commit crimes besides drug use. But would the amount of crimes committed be reduced if drugs were legalized? And would the cost of those crimes be less than the cost of enforcing anti-drug laws? It makes no economic sense to spend a billion dollars a year fighting ten million dollars worth of crime. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heroin-legalization-why-the-same-tired-objections/672300.md?page=2)