So are caffeine, alcohol, and nicotine (in increasing order of how addictive.)
> It would make more sense to significantly decriminalize it, but keep it illegal, so that addicts can get treatment without fear of legal repercussion
Legalizing it does that, too; “significant decriminalization” without legalization is mostly an incoherent approach that serves no policy end particularly well.
> I don't understand what would be gained by legalizing it wholesale though.
Greater harm reduction than mere decriminalization because of oversight and accountability for quality; greater diversion of funds out of organized crime, rogue states, and terrorist organizations and into the legal domestic economy. Greater tax revenues. Decreased demand for US foreign intervention, covert and military, to cut off the illegal supply at the source when, as consistently happens domestic law enforcement fails to adequately combat the illegal trade.
Only if the bill wasn't "inspired" by some group that wants to sell opium. For such a group, trying to piggyback opium on the current wave of marihuana legalization would be a once in a lifetime opportunity.
But it still would not make much sense because existing opiate sellers, both legal and illegal, seem to be on the winning side of existing regulation.
No, we should be making it much harder for them to do so.
It's all the crap it gets cut with by shady dealers that kill people.
Opium may be addictive, but given its low potential for overdose it is highly preferable for addicts to use opium as opposed to oxycodone, heroin, fentanyl, carfentanyl, etc.
We've proven over time that 'get people to stop doing drugs' isn't a viable end game. It's not going to happen.
The best we can do is harm reduction, at least in this case we can stop people getting fentanyl, thinking it's oxycodone or heroin, and OD-ing.