I could accept keeping some drugs legal, provided some rational criteria — rather than just "it freaks out the suits". For example, "anything worse than the the worst currently legal (alcohol) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rational_scale_to_assess_the_harm_of_drugs_(mean_physical_harm_and_mean_dependence).svg)" i.e. methadone, barbiturates, cocaine, and heroin. (Table 3 on page Ev 114 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/31_07_06_drugsreport.pdf) has a linear ranking of the average score on all three criteria groups.) Age restrictions using tobacco and alcohol as guides (anything up through tobacco with the same age restriction as tobacco — 18ish depending on jurisdiction IIRC — and anything from there up through alcohol with the same age restriction as alcohol — 21) would also make sense.
I do agree that pot legalization is a priority, as it's just plain over-prosecuted and used as a political weapon.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 6/7/11 16:13 (UTC)I do agree that pot legalization is a priority, as it's just plain over-prosecuted and used as a political weapon.