Fair enough. Thanks for finally responding.
I just can’t see a huge increase in users of hard drugs following legalization. I doubt that most people who use drugs that they know could kill them are deterred by the slight chance of arrest. Again I have to ask why we did not have a nation full of cocaine and heroin addicts at the turn of the 20th century?
Criminalization does nothing but compound the problem. Compare a cleaned-up heroin junky who was once convicted of possession, to a recovering alcoholic who never got convicted of a crime. Which of them do you think will have an easier time finding a job when he gets out of rehab?
Well, there are plenty of addicts as it is. Do you really think legalization will produce so many more addicts that costs of their healthcare will outweigh the tens of billions of dollars a year currently spent on the drug war?
Do we allow teachers and nurses to show up to work drunk?
Who says cocaine would have to be sold in a pill? And who says that the industry would have to be innovative? Cocaine HCl is cocaine HCl, whether it’s being used in 1875, or in 2075.
Also, from what I’ve heard (no personal experience), addicts tend not to like Methadone because the euphoric effects of it are far less pronounced than other opiates.
Sure, why not? Why should one man’s poison be sold openly, while another’s lands him in prison?
R&D? We’re talking about drugs that have been around for more than a century, here! Additionally, many of these drugs are already being produced by pharmaceutical companies. Methamphetamine and cocaine are both Schedule II drugs in the U.S., and heroin is available by prescription in the U.K.
Supply chain and liability issues don’t make for a very compelling argument either, when you consider the legal intoxicants that have to jump over the same hurdles. The companies that produce them still manage to remain profitable, and their products are still affordable.
These concerns of yours seem rather pedantic when compared to the obscene monetary costs and social problems borne entirely of the War on Drugs.
I don’t know if Oxycontin is such a good example. AFAIK, it’s still under patent, which drives the cost up. Also, it’s a time-release medication. Those tend to be more expensive than their shorter-acting cousins. The last time I was prescribed oxycodone (for the removal of my wisdom teeth a few years back), the stuff was dirt cheap. Hydrocodone, too - hell, that stuff is the single most frequently prescribed drug in the United States, at over 92 million prescriptions written every year. The cocktail of amphetamines known as Adderall is pretty high up on that list, as well.
Then we must have one kick-ass plan for legally distributing alcohol, because I’m not seeing too many Capone-style bootlegging gangs roaming the country.