As little as 50 years ago, selling these drugs wasn't illegal in the US. Look how far we've come.
But legalization of heroin, crack, cocaine, meth? That's really a pipe dream. It might happen some day, but that'd be more on the range of 70-100 years if I were to guess, and perhaps a lot longer.
Marijuana is a significant portion of sales on all of the dark markets, but other more addictive narcotics still constitute the majority compared to marijuana.
But the ethical imperative to allow people full control over what substances go into their own bodies seems to be as ignored as ever.
Simple example: I'm not legally allowed to control the levels of testosterone in my own body. That seems absurd.
#MyBodyMyChoice
Many drugs have indirect impacts. Jacking up on testosterone, for example, makes you aggressive and violent.
Many people want the government to look out for them. For example, the regulatory rigor around new medicine.
Many proponents of complete legalization of all substances argue that responsible users have no impact on others. However while this may be true of responsible users, empirical evidence suggests vanishingly few users are responsible, which is the major problem.
You have to weight the infringement on the rights & freedoms of innocent bystanders suffering at the hands of the abusers, against the infringement of rights from outlawing the drug. Somebody must loose; which should it be?
Maybe the rational conclusion is still, "make it legal", but this is the real question. It is not as simple as "my body, my choice".
Most users are responsible, but since they are responsible, they won't impact you, or anyone, and you'll never hear of them
And, I took the most addictive drug to illustrate this.
What is the net negative impact that MDMA users, for instance, have on other people ? Other than being nice to the point of being annoying, but, well, if we talk about this kind of negative impact, what are we waiting to make ethanol illegal ?
This is a good question to ask in some hypothetical world where making it illegal actually stops people from consuming it.
That's clearly not our world, though, so the question is actually of little relevance. Laws punishing consumption have been shown, empirically, to violate the rights and freedoms of both the users and of the innocent bystanders (by preventing users from becoming non-users).
I'm almost positive someone will be absolutely indignant at my temerity for suggesting the above, but it's worth thinking about what real legalization would look like.
http://www.ttb.gov/spirits/faq.shtml
This is different from brewing beer, cider and winemaking, which are quite differently regulated.
One of the primary selling points of legalization was to increase state revenue. This is how the state collects. Personally, I'm not at all bothered by this.
As little as 20 years ago, spraying your crops with DDT wasn't illegal. Look how far we've come.
As little as 5 years ago, selling furniture treated with brominated flame retardants wasn't illegal in the EU. Look how far we've come.
We are wrong about chemicals all the time. The regulatory status of chemical X fifty years ago rarely means much.
But before we get rid of the current legislation about drugs, we would need an actual plan for dealing with irresponsible uses of drugs.
If people could take heroin or ice and (a) stop whenever they wanted and (b) still function as society expects then nobody would have an issue with them being legal. But drugs like those effectively rewire the brain and are incredibly destructive. A significant amount of domestic violence, child abuse, family breakdown incidents are directly attributable to drugs. You can't blame society for not wanting drugs like those to be readily accessible.
Regardless, the current legislative frameworks around the world (with few exceptions) are based on fear and a twisted sense of morality rather than actual harm.
I still got clean, because the risk of getting caught and the impact that would have on my future outweighed my addiction. I'm glad I did, and I'm lucky Australia treats it as a medical problem, not a criminal one, when you seek help.
The counter culture won. America is the world's largest welfare state, has the largest entitlement systems, with a total government system larger than the economy of Japan, hyper regulation, high taxation, and has very few remnants of Capitalism.
AFAICT when people came down from whatever it was and actually tried to live their 'new' ways, they pretty much degenerated and fell apart after short times for all sorts of reasons.
Being a corporate drone is not an aspiration. Feeding your family and having a nice place for them to live certainly is though.
These are not noble drug dealers harming nobody.
They are sociopathic assholes selling whatever makes money, even if the ONLY reason for the item is to harm innocent individuals against their will.