Should Recreational Drugs Be Legalized In The U.S.?
SLS-1105 Strategy for Success
March 6, 2010
By definition, Recreational drug is any substance with pharmacologic effects that is taken voluntarily for personal pleasure or satisfaction rather than for medicinal purposes. The term is generally applied to alcohol, barbiturates, amphetamines, THC, PCP, cocaine, and heroin but also includes caffeine in coffee and cola beverages. Most substance abuse through any agent has significant psychotropic effects–used without medical indications or prescription in the context of social interactions–e.g., parties) On the other hand, Legalize is defined under law to make lawful or legal, to confirm or validate something previously unlawful or to decriminalize. What is the connection between the two? By excluding the legal substances from a definition of drugs, the legalist emphasizes that what matters in the issue of drug control is not what a drug does to the body or mind but how a drug is classified by the law. I believe that the legalistic definition of drugs represents a barrier to our understanding of drug legalization debate. In effect it closes off the debate on legalization. If the currently illegal drugs were legalized, would that mean that, overnight- according to this definition- they would automatically cease to be drugs? As we dig deeper and look below the surface, there are developing new insights on the issue to decriminalized recreational drugs. Some believers think marijuana has real value for sick people. They've seen that it's not the demon weed the government often makes it out to be.
Sensible Colorado's Brian Vicente, while he opposes Representative Tom Massey's measure as currently written in his bill - a bill the lawmakers say would protect patients' access to marijuana while forcing providers to be licensed by the state and to operate as nonprofits (http://vvoice.vo.llnwd.net/e6/4395719.0.pdf). Vicente is in favor of both regulating...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document