NationStates Jolt Archive

Quixotia is considering proposing the following:


Quixotia has noted that many potential resolutions for the legalisation of drugs, to a lesser or greater degree, have recently been proposed. Our belief in the importance of individual free choice means that we are in favour of some of these, but we maintain that for the most part that they are less considered than they could be; the issues of the role of government in the handling of legal drugs, the infrastructure that would be required, and the potential problems with the transition between a time when drugs are illegal and a time when they are illegal, have gone largely unaddressed. We therefore propose the following:

1) That a referendum be held in each member nation at any point when legalisation of a certain drug is being considered, which process must take place on a drug-by-drug basis. The government must hold this whenever pressure groups and public opinion has successfully placed the issue on the political agenda, as cannabis legalisation is in many countries today. A majority in favour of or against the proposal will determine whether or not the drug is legalised. Decisions must be reviewed every 5 years by an independent and impartial body, to be set up by the UN, in order that new scientific research into drugs may have a bearing on their legal status. This body will be known as the United Nations Drugs Committee (UNDC).

2) That any government seeking to legalise a drug as the result of such a referendum be required, before it is legalised, to submit to the UN appropriate assurance that their infrastructure is adequate. This would include:

2.1 - Plans for the production, by the state or by private enterprise, of the drug, incorporating quality control. Exact guidelines for quality control will be established by the UNDC.

2.2 - Plans for the sale, by the state or by private enterprise, of the drug, incorporating sufficient controls on advertising. Advertising to minors, for example, will not be tolerated and will result in punitive measures such as fines being enforced by the UN against the relevant institutions. Any fines collected will go towards UNDC funds. Exact guidelines for the control of advertising and sales will be established by the UNDC.

2.3 - Details of the role that the government is planning to take in matters involving this drug, most notably taxation and age regulation. We recommend moderate to heavy taxation of any drugs legalised to create government revenue and deter unwise use. Age regulation is likewise recommended, and like taxation would be at the discretion of individual governments as with alcohol, tobacco, vehicles etc.

2.4 - Assurance that the government has considered the possible drawbacks of legalisation thoroughly (including indirect effects such as the possibility of drug lords turning to other crime, the ethical ramifications of possibly having to trade with such people, etc) and has developed basic strategies for dealing with these adverse effects. Guidance on this will be provided by the UNDC to all nations.

3) The formation and maintenance of the UNDC will require funding. To this end, a 3% charge will be levied on each sale of drugs (on top of any government imposed tax) and the proceeds given to the UN. After the UNDC is suitably funded, surplus money will go towards funding the many other worthwhile activities of the UN. The charge need not apply in cases where a relevant authority such as a GP has certified that the drug is for medicinal use; we recommend that taxes are also waived in such cases. The size and extent of the charge will be regularly reviewed by the UNDC.

4) The legal status of drugs already legal for medical use need not be altered, unless the government feels that the people demand such a change.

5) The UNDC will amass individuals with expertise and knowledge of various aspects of the important worldwide matter of drugs, from scientific, sociological, historical and other varied backgrounds. The committee will therefore be able to provide guidance and produce reports for the main body of the UN on any drug-related issues which arise, through appropriate research projects, public surveys and other means. This proposal thus provides the UN with a necessary, useful and self-funding authority on the subject of drugs.

When the UNDC is satisfied that all requirements (including other requirements which may be added in future) have been met, they may authorise the government to legalise the drug. The UNDC has the final word on whether or not a proposal from a government is authorised.

Quixotia urges all regional delegates to support this proposal in the interests of free choice, government and UN funding, and the clear need for sensible and cautious drug law reform.


How much support would there be for such a proposal, and are there any suggestions for items to be added, removed or changed?

If anybody has any questions or needs something clarified, please reply to this post; alternatively, feel free to send me a telegram.

Thank you very much for your time,

MN - Quixotia

Does this bill actually do anything? What most of it basically says is "nations don't have to worry about breaking UN rules when they're working with drugs, as long as they're not breaking UN rules." Then it levies a tax and forces illegal drugs to be looked over every 5 years. (The only clause of any real consequence.) It could be written a lot more concisely.

All drugs should be banned; even caffine.

Fair play on the being concise bit, Ubernerds, I've never been the best at that :oops:

However, I do disagree that the bill does not really do anything, though it is certainly, and intentionally, more conservative than other recent drugs proposals. It sets up a permanent UN drugs committee, which seems pretty useful, and basically forces member states to have a referendum whenever pressure for legalisation of a drug has forced the issue onto the agenda. This means that drugs are much more likely to be legalised than with no coherent policy; however, the onus is on individual nations to decide, enabling them to retain a great degree of autonomy.

Thanks for your comment :-)

Oppressed Possums, interesting viewpoint, but why? Thank you too.

...

Sorry about that... I posted three times by accident and couldn't delete the others.

Oppressed Possums, interesting viewpoint, but why? Thank you too.

If you are going to create drug legislation, why not be thorough?

Being thorough was indeed the primary aim of this proposal. Being thorough is not at all the same thing as banning all drugs, though. This proposal attempts to cover all eventualities regarding drug legalisation. It is quite possible that it has a loophole that I have missed, and maybe somebody can point this out. The thrust of the proposal, though, in its advocation of majority rule on the issue, seems fundamentally opposed to your point of view - which is fair enough, but some more constructive suggestions would be appreciated... anyone?

I find it to be highly constructive. The original intent of the "world community" when drug bans were first considered was to ban ALL drugs including such things as caffine.

The world community is too large, and above all too varied, to profess to hold the right solutions for every nation within it. My proposal will allow each nation to decide what to legalise for itself, while receiving advice and guidance from a permanent UN drugs committee.

Also, just because it was 'the original intent', does that mean it was necessarily right? Perhaps the original intent of the world community was to discriminate against homosexuals, but a glance around this forum will reveal that times have changed. Legislation should change with them.

Thanks for your continued debate.

Well, homosexuality has been around as long as there has been "civilization" at least. They said that women didn't brains so they turned to guys for meaningful relationships.

If you leave it up to the individual nations, then it is meaningless because the UN is all or nothing.

Do you mean that UN resolutions cannot take the circumstances and choices of the people in individual nations into account? It certainly sounds like it...

Anyway - I'm going to propose this in a few days, after trying to make it a bit more concise and punchy, so I would welcome any more suggestions - perhaps from anyone who stated in the poll that they would vote for the proposal if slightly altered? What alterations do you suggest? Thanks.

Oh, great, another drug proposal. I can see the text of it now:

"FREE teh WEED!!!!!1 weed is not bad 4 u in fact its reely good it dosnt kill briancells it acturaly makes u smarter and gives u teh super powerz!!!!!1 any1 who doesnt wnt 2 smoke weed is a nazi and they shuld all die!!!1 while were at it lets lower teh dinkng age to 5 years old becuse how come its okay 4 u to get a drivrs lisense when ur 16 but u cant drink beer till ur 21? its teh govrment man there all a bunch of nazis lets free teh WEED!!1!!! oh, man, i need a hit, i'm freakin' out, man"

And the stoners will vote, and the cokeheads will vote, and the junkies will vote, and the alcoholics will vote.... and I'll die a little inside. :roll:

Look, all these people tell you why drugs should be legalized: The war on drugs has failed, they say. Drugs are illegal, but people still do them. Well throw me a freakin' bone, here.... let's legalize murder, too, because last time I checked, murder was illegal, but people are still doing it.

But what these people cannot tell you is how humaity as a whole would benefit from having drugs legal. Please, oh please, tell me how the world would become a better place if we had children, teachers, parents, criminals, and people who are already complete psychos to begin with, all wacked out on drugs. Sure, the snack food industry would prosper, and so would the fireams industry, but society as a whole would collapse.

Look, I'm a hard-core Straightedge: I don't drink, I don't smoke, I don't do drugs, I don't drink coffee (because it tastes terrible), so I'm pretty freaking biased when it comes to the drug issue. But I can also tell you that my living drug, tobacco, and alchohol free makes my life a hell of a lot more fun and fufilling than the lives you people live. For one, I don't need to smoke, swallow, or shoot up something to have a good day, and I don't spend 40% of my paycheck on substances that destroy my body. And plus, I'm going to outlive pretty much everyone that I hate, which is very satisfying, in my opinion.

So go ahead, sumbit your UN proposal. There's a 2% chance that it might become a resolution, and if that happens, then there's a .001% chance that it will pass and become law. But know this: drugs will never be legal in the United States of America, or the Holy Empire of Ustasha, and you have free-thinking people like me to thank for it.

-Emperor JIm.

Anybody who's met me would describe me as relatively straightlaced too. I don't even drink carbinated drinks because I dislike their taste.

However, I do respect the right of others to do whatever the hell they want with their bodies. They are their bodies aren't they?

The sort of proposal you parodied earlier is precisely what I have aimed, fairly successfully in my view, to counter, and you must admit that mine is a little more considered than your parody. Your use of the word 'never' is extremely near-sighted; maybe you don't want drugs to be legal, which is fair enough, but there is no way that you can categorically state that governments in the future will never consider legalising any of them. I will indeed submit my proposal (I may as well seeing as I put some effort into writing it):) and I will just hope that other Regional Delegates don't see themselves as possessing, alone, more important wishes than the majority of an entire nation. Thank you for your comments.

I'm not a stoner, or a cokehead, or a junkie, or an alcoholic. I'm just a person who believes in majority rule and the free choice 'of others to do whatever the hell they want with their bodies' as The Global Market puts it. And I wouldn't mind getting in first with some laws governing drugs so that they don't end up being legalised indiscriminately by such people as you despise.

Anybody who's met me would describe me as relatively straightlaced too. I don't even drink carbinated drinks because I dislike their taste.

However, I do respect the right of others to do whatever the hell they want with their bodies. They are their bodies aren't they?

I'm inclined to agree with The Global Market on this. But I'll add something else as well, along the same lines as what I've said about prostitution and pornography:

Drugs are bad for you--there's no question about that. But the government, by making them illegal, has made them much worse for you than need be.

If drugs were legal, junkies wouldn't worry about being caught when they participate in needle-exchange programs. Participation rates would increase, and the spread of AIDS would be slowed. Yes, they'd still be addicted to herion, which is bad--but not as bad as having AIDS.

If drugs were legal, the government could regulate their manufacture and put labelling requirements on them. Potheads wouldn't find that their pot had been dipped in PCP without their knowledge. Coke wouldn't get cut with strychnine. Marijuana and cocaine are both bad for you, but not nearly as bad for you as are angel dust or rat poison.

If drugs were legal, it would cut out one of the biggest cash cows of organized crime, and reduce the incentive to violence among both dealers and addicts. How frequently do people get shot over cigarettes?

If drugs were legal for sale to adults, it would be a lot easier to keep them out of the hands of kids. With illegal drugs, sellers have no incentive to be picky about their buyers--if they get caught, they're going to jail, no matter whom they sell to. If drugs were peddled to adults by respectable merchants who knew they'd be locked up for sales to children, they'd have a strong incentive to avoid handing them out without checking I.D.

If drugs were legal, out-of-control addicts would get the medical treatment they need to recover, rather than being locked up and learning about life from violent felons.

Sincerely,
Miranda Googleplex
United Nations Ambassador
Community of Gurthark

Well said, I'm glad some people are willing not to be dogmatic over this important issue.

Right, I'm submitting this version tonight, if there are no last minute suggestions:

Quixotia has noted that many potential resolutions for the legalisation of drugs, to a lesser or greater degree, have recently been proposed. We maintain that for the most part that they are less considered than they could be; the issues of the role of government in the handling of legal drugs and the infrastructure that would be required have gone largely unaddressed. We therefore propose the following:

1) That a referendum be held in each member nation at any point when legalisation of a certain drug is being considered, which process must take place on a drug-by-drug basis. The government must hold this whenever pressure groups and public opinion has successfully placed the issue on the political agenda, as cannabis legalisation is in many countries today. A majority in favour of or against the proposal will determine whether or not the drug is legalised. Decisions must be reviewed every 5 years by an independent and impartial body, to be set up by the UN, in order that new scientific research into drugs may have a bearing on their legal status. This body will be known as the United Nations Drugs Committee (UNDC).

2) That any government seeking to legalise a drug as the result of such a referendum be required, before it is legalised, to submit to the UN appropriate assurance that their infrastructure is adequate. This would include:

2.1 - Plans for the production, by the state or by private enterprise, of the drug, incorporating quality control. Exact guidelines for quality control will be established by the UNDC.

2.2 - Plans for the sale, by the state or by private enterprise, of the drug, incorporating sufficient controls on advertising. Advertising to minors, for example, will not be tolerated and will result in punitive measures such as fines being enforced by the UN against the relevant institutions. Any fines collected will go towards UNDC funds. Exact guidelines for the control of advertising and sales will be established by the UNDC.

2.3 - Details of the role that the government is planning to take in matters involving this drug, most notably taxation and age regulation. We recommend moderate to heavy taxation of any drugs legalised to create government revenue and deter unwise use. Age regulation is likewise recommended, and like taxation would be at the discretion of individual governments as with alcohol, tobacco, vehicles etc.

2.4 - Assurance that the government has considered the possible drawbacks of legalisation thoroughly (including indirect effects such as the possibility of drug lords turning to other crime, the ethical ramifications of possibly having to trade with such people, etc) and has developed basic strategies for dealing with these adverse effects. Guidance on this will be provided by the UNDC to all nations.

When the UNDC is satisfied that all requirements (including other requirements which may be added in future) have been met, they may authorise the government to legalise the drug. The UNDC has the final word on whether or not a proposal from a government is authorised.
3) The formation and maintenance of the UNDC will require funding. To this end, a 3% charge will be levied on each sale of drugs (on top of any government imposed tax) and the proceeds given to the UN. After the UNDC is suitably funded, surplus money will go towards funding the many other worthwhile activities of the UN. The charge need not apply in cases where a relevant authority such as a GP has certified that the drug is for medicinal use; we recommend that taxes are also waived in such cases. The size and extent of the charge will be regularly reviewed by the UNDC.

4) The legal status of drugs already legal for medical use need not be altered, unless the government feels that the people demand such a change.

5) The UNDC will amass individuals with expertise and knowledge of various aspects of the important worldwide matter of drugs, from scientific, sociological, historical and other varied backgrounds. The committee will therefore be able to provide guidance and produce reports for the main body of the UN on any drug-related issues which arise, through appropriate research projects, public surveys, etc.

Quixotia urges all regional delegates to support this proposal in the interests of free choice, government and UN funding, and the clear need for sensible and cautious drug law reform.


Thanks everyone!

MN - Quixotia

Won't let me post it! Damn! Will keep trying...