I've just been watching Trainspotting, which prompted me to do some Googling. It turns out that LSD and Magic Mushrooms aren't generally harmful or addictive, and Ecstasy isn't much worse either - which got me thinking, why are these things illegal if they're not harmful?

I think it's the fact that when drunk you do silly stuff, but it tends to still be "you" doing them. However going on an LSD trip is potentially surrendering the responsibility of your actions to someone who thinks the walls have lips and the ceiling is melting.

Not quite the reality.

LSD and ecstasy also showed promise in psychotherapy before the hysteria stunted that avenue.

I think we should be having a proper grown-up discussion about legalising all drugs in this country.

Why is it okay to sell drugs in the form of alcohol and tobacco, simply because they are available through licensed vendors? If we legalised narcotics of all kinds, so you could only acquire them through licensed premises, surely this would be a smart move? From what I can see, the legal drugs are more harmful than many of the illegal ones. That discrepancy ought to be fixed.

Buying drugs over a counter from a properly regulated source would help cut crime, healthcare could be improved, and it could be taxed like booze and fags. I see only benefits from such a change.

Indeed. I couldn't agree more.

A little drug related trivia - Heroin is/was a Bayer trademark.

On the face of it, it seems a good idea. It works in other countries. But my main concern has been and always be the British population. Look at the British. I don't mean you or your families or your friends. I mean the whole country. Look at the alcoholics. We can barely help them. Those who are homeless because of alcoholism and continue to drink. Look at the behaviour of those who go out on binges. Look at the number of people admitted because of alcohol-related problems, burgeoning the NHS.

If the British were a nice, polite people, able to control their drinking and restrain their behaviour, I'd probably be okay with legalisation. If we didn't have the problems we already have, it might work. But imagine those on a weekend drinking binge. Some of them already indulge in drugs. Now increase that number. More would get hooked and whittle away their money.

Let's go to the medical side of things. I've seen people in their late twenties/early thirties with cocaine-induced heart attacks and strokes. I can't imagine how that would change with legalisation. You'd still have to price it such that it was competitive but workable and able to generate enough income to care for these people. I've seen such people require full nursing care. There are costs beyond just setting up and selling to stuff.

Legalising euthanasia IMO would be more worthwhile than legalising recreational drugs. You would end the suffering of thousands, as well removing the burden off families and carers, and save money from the ongoing costs of care.

These are my concerns. If the British were a better people, it might work. It won't. It will fail.

Look at holland where it has been decriminalised and uptake by locals has fallen even though it is perfectly legal.

I still refer you back to my issues about the British population. We are not the Dutch.

Yes but you're ignoring the fact of the large use of drugs already.

Legalisation would mean regulation. Many bad cases I suggest are because drugs are not regulated and often get cut with all sorts of crap. Smokers currently subsidise non-smokers in the NHS and this could also be the case for drug users.

Regulation also means information and people can then make informed decisions about what they want to do, at an appropriate age. It would also mean provision can be made to help people who have problems although, for example, ecstasy is not addictive unless cut with something like amphetamines.

The current lack of legalisation and regulation means that in some cases people commit petty crime in order to go to prison so that they can get a guaranteed place on a drugs rehabilitation programme.

On a separate note I'd personally feel safer walking about on a Friday night with people off their heads on E than off their heads on drink. If someone comes up to you on E the worst physical attack you'll get is a big hug.

If you consider the numbers of people who take ecstasy eack week and how low the numbers who die actually are. Alcohol and tobacco kill far more.

I do wonder if legalisation would really increase drug consumption significantly.

Most things are readily available to those that want them anyway. You might say "I wouldn't know where to get cocaine" - but then, you probably wouldn't buy it legally from the local branch of Boots either.

Mushrooms, along with many other things, occur naturally. They don't need regulation. They need knowledgeable people to understand their affects and what can be achieved by taking them. Indigenous peoples the world over have been using hallucinogens for thousands of years for a variety of spiritual, and other, purposes.

But in answer to your question Linux, I believe alcohol and tobacco are sold legally whilst others are criminalized, because they are better at controlling the population and offer the easier method for those in control to do so. </Bratty>

Bearing in mind that some peoples use drugs for enlightenment, it does sort of make sense that governments wouldn't want us to become enlightened.

And some people use them to gurn the night away in a field that's left covered in litter, before wandering off in a stupor and possibly drowning in a reservoir. http://www.thisissouthdevon.co.uk/news/Police-renew-appeal-amid-search-missing-man-Joel/article-3604497-detail/article.html

There again, why is there frequently 3 police vans parked on the harbour side here every thursday, friday and saturday night? Because of booze, and drug, related violence and general silliness in front of 4 lanes of traffic and the sea.
Rather like the child that breaks a toy in a shop, and is reprimanded with 'This is why you can't have nice things.' the great British public apparently can't sort themselves out responsibly.