For drug users, the high price of illicit drugs makes it difficult and often impossible to obtain the drug without committing further crimes. Unemployed heroin addicts, for example, cannot easily find ways to finance their addiction without resorting to robbery and robbery to obtain the funds needed to buy the drugs they need. A state-controlled drug distribution system could easily solve these problems and make them available to those who need them at little or no cost. This would benefit society as a whole. Is legalization worth playing? The arguments on both sides are compelling. What should we do if we cannot accept or clearly reject the legalization of drugs? One approach proposed as reasonable is to suspend the verdict, acknowledge that legalization advocates are partly right (that the war on drugs has proven ineffective in reducing drug abuse and drug-related crime), and recognize that it`s time to explore new approaches. Even as the country moves toward broader decriminalization of drugs, drug legalization remains a contentious issue. For every argument for why drugs should be legal, there is one that focuses on why drugs should not be legalized. And there are statistics on drug legalization that support both sides of the problem. Ultimately, psychiatrists worry that an increase in marijuana use among young adults due to drug legalization could lead to an increase in what`s known as cannabis use disorder.
According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, up to 30% of those who use marijuana may have a cannabis use disorder. And the risk could be greater right now, as research shows that young adults suffer from pandemic-related stress, anxiety and virtual isolation more than any other age group. Therefore, they use marijuana as a coping mechanism. Another major problem with drugs at present is that there is no quality control in their production. The amount of active ingredient in a dose of a street drug can vary widely, and often these drugs contain additional harmful ingredients. This uncertainty makes it impossible for the user to calculate the correct amount of the drug and leads to accidental overdoses and easily preventable deaths. If recreational drugs were legalized, their production and composition could be monitored and their use would be much safer. Libertarian arguments are often used in the drug debate (“as long as I don`t hurt anyone, it`s my business..”) and in the vaccine debate. Our democratic systems emphasize this fundamental freedom of individuals to choose what they find valuable. The argument, based on the analogy between alcohol and tobacco and psychoactive drugs, is weak because its conclusion that psychoactive drugs should be legalized does not follow from its premises. It is illogical to say that because alcohol and tobacco wreak havoc (for example, they are responsible for 500,000 premature deaths each year), a heavy toll of legalization is acceptable.
In fact, the opposite seems more logical: banning the use of alcohol, tobacco and psychoactive drugs because of the harm they all cause. In addition, marijuana, heroin, cocaine, crack and the rest of the psychoactive drugs are not harmless substances – they have serious negative consequences for the health of users and the responsibility for addiction. The question for experts in young adult mental health is: What does decriminalization of drugs mean for this age group? Will drug legalization lead to an increase in drug abuse and marijuana addiction for Gen Z? Proponents of legalization admit that consumption would likely increase, but counter that it is not clear that the increase would be very large or time-consuming, especially if legalization were paired with appropriate public education programs. They, too, cite historical evidence to support their claims, noting that opium, heroin, and cocaine use had already begun to decline before prohibition went into effect, that alcohol consumption did not suddenly increase after prohibition was repealed, and that the decriminalization of cannabis use in 11 U.S. states in the 1970s did not lead to a dramatic increase in use. Some also point to the legal sale of cannabis products through regulated outlets in the Netherlands, which also does not appear to have significantly encouraged consumption by Dutch nationals. Opinion polls showing that most Americans would not rush to try previously banned drugs that suddenly became available are also being used to bolster the case for legalization. One of the main arguments in favor of legalizing drugs is that other harmful drugs are already legal: especially alcohol and tobacco, but sugar and coffee are also sometimes mentioned. Data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) show the gap between the use of legal drugs (alcohol, tobacco and increasingly marijuana) and illicit drugs.
Among Americans 12 and older, about 51 percent have consumed alcohol in the past 30 days, while about 21 percent have used tobacco. The percentage of those who used marijuana is almost 12%, which is considerably higher than those who used opioids (1%) or cocaine (0.7%). While the alternative of legalization usually emerges when fear of drugs and public despair of existing policies are at their peak, it never seems to disappear from the media radar screen for long. Periodic incidents — such as the heroine-induced death of a wealthy young couple in New York City in 1995, or then-surgeon general Jocelyn Elders` remark in 1993 that legalization could be beneficial and should be investigated — guarantee this. The importance of many of those who have advocated for legalization at various times, such as William F. Buckley, Jr., Milton Friedman, and George Shultz, also helps. But every time the issue of legalization is raised, the same arguments for and against are dusted off and trampled on, so we don`t have a clearer understanding of what it might entail and what the implications might be. More addicts, addicts and addicts would mean more health problems and lower economic productivity. But there is another problem with this argument: in many older societies, the use of the most dangerous and potent drugs was actually regulated and restricted. Yes, people drank alcohol in ancient Athens, but hallucinogenic drugs were only used in certain rituals, under the supervision of priests and under strict social control;4 and the same is probably true for most other examples of drug use in traditional societies.
Even the use of recreational drugs such as alcohol was probably much more monitored by society in these traditional societies, as everyone knew everyone in a certain social circle and people had to be careful not to harm their social position. The anonymity of modern society and its lack of social cohesion allow drug abuse in ways that would be much harder to reach (and hide) in older societies. The question of whether Bill Clinton “inhaled” when he tried marijuana as a college student came closest to the drug problem during the last presidential campaign. However, the current one could be very different. For the fourth year in a row, a federally backed national survey of U.S. high school students conducted by the University of Michigan found an increase in drug use. After a decade or more of declining drug use, Republicans are certain to blame President Clinton for the bad news and attack him for failing to maintain the high-profile stance of the Bush and Reagan administrations on drugs. The extent of this problem is less certain, but if the worrying trend of drug use among young people continues, the public debate on how best to address the drug problem will clearly not end with the elections. Indeed, there are already growing fears that the large wave of adolescents – the group most at risk of drugs – that will peak at the turn of the century will be accompanied by a further increase in drug use. With an increasing number of states legalizing marijuana and other drugs, the debate continues over whether the negative effects of drug decriminalization outweigh the positive effects. Researchers, policy-makers and public health officials provide arguments on both sides. For mental health experts, however, the most pertinent question is how the legalization of drugs will affect addiction and addiction.
A regulated recreational drug market would provide states with tax revenue that could be used to better control drugs or support addicts. A 1994 document estimates marijuana tax revenues in the United States at only between $3 billion and $9 billion per year.1 In comparison, the budget of the U.S. Department of Education in 1992 was about $30 billion; and in 1993, U.S. tobacco tax revenues were about $12 billion.2 Today, there is a movement in many societies towards the liberalization of drug laws. This can be either legalization of certain drugs (drug trafficking and use become legal) or decriminalization of their use (the drug is still not freely available, but its use is not considered a criminal offence; instead, it is regulated and controlled by other means).