NationStates Jolt Archive

Legalize the Use of Drugs
A resolution to ban, legalize, or encourage recreational drugs.

Category: Recreational Drug Use
Decision: Legalize
Proposed by: Denguli

Description:
The General Assembly of the United Nations,

UNDERSTANDING that the use of drugs is not healthy for the human corpse;

ALSO UNDERSTANDING that there are already drugs on the Western market, under the name of alcohol (which is proved to be a hard drug similar to opium) and nicotin (which is a natural substance in the tobacco plant and is proved to be a soft drug and which is also proved to be one of the most addicting drugs);

EMPHASIZING that the use of drugs is a persons own decision (like persons can also choose to drink alcohol, or smoke tobacco) and if its been outlawed, personal freedom will be
affected;

NOTING WITH REGRET that still many country's have drug laws that prohibit the use of drugs, so that personal freedom has already been affected for a long time;

1. URGES the UN to bring forth a new treaty in which the specifications on internationallegalization of drugs will be written;

2. RECOMMENDS the UN to add in this treaty, the restriction of the use of drugs to indicated areas, such as peoples own homes;

3. FURTHER URGES all member nations to sign and ratify the treaty, as stated in operative clause one;

4. ASKS for the creation of a new UN organ, which will be called the UNOGLD (United Nations Organization on Global Legalization of Drugs), which tasks will be:
a. to control all nations, that have signed the treaty, as
stated in operative clause one, on the ratification of
the treaty;
b. to give aid, to country's that need this aid, by means
of, but not limited to:
i sending specialists on the area of political
issues, like this issue, in order to aid country's
in the legislation of the legalization of drugs;
ii encouraging and aiding country's in the making, or
building, of distribution centres, where everybody
of or over the age of 18 can buy soft drugs
(excluding tobacco) and everybody of or over the
age of 21 can buy hard drugs (excluding alcohol);
iii aiding country's in the help of persons with drugs
addictions;

5. TRUSTS that the number of persons with drugs addictions will stagnate or even decrease, since the excitement of the use of drugs will be gone, so that less people will try it and get addicted.

Approvals: 3 (Nick52B, WZ Forums, New Hamilton)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 121 more approvals

This is my proposal for the legalization of drugs. It's the original proposal and I know I made some mistakes, but those mistakes are only cosmetic. If you're in favour, please, approve this proposal, if you're against, please, debate and, if necessary, argue. :)

Thanks to the supporters,

Denguli.

IC: Opposed.

OOC: Sorry, I can't think up a better response right now. I'll reply more fully later. I would just like to posit one thing though. The argument that "if we legalise it, it will lose its alure" may well have some basis in evidence, and may be a well thought out line of reasoning. It also strikes me as utter balls. The thought that "ooh, this is a bit naughty, tee hee hee" does not for one second come vaguely close to the sheer, unadulterated rapture of a good trip.

It's clear you don't live in the Netherlands

I support the concept of pushing drug legalisation onto nations through the UN, but I can't support this proposal. The cosmetic problems are significant, the actions of the operative clauses seem confused and frequently ineffective, and the arguments need significant development. Setting universal age limits is foolish, and assuming we can all agree on what consitutes hard or soft drugs, or even drugs in the first place, is a no-no.

Well, this opens debate :)

Yes, i know the cosmetic problems are quite significant, that's why I'm trying to fix this and send in a new proposal a.s.a.p. But what I do not see is how the operative clauses are confusing, since they each solve a part of the problem, that's why I think the proposal is quite complete.

But remember, I'm just a beginner. :p

Ok. It's just that the whole mechanism by which you implement the changes is not one which works very well for the NSUN. Resolutions don't call on the UN to make treaties and urge nations to sign them. At least in terms of mechanism, the NSUN is a lot closer to a federalised nation than the real UN is. Resolutions are laws. They do things like directly require or urge nations to legalise drugs. Your resolution has the UN asking itself to write a treaty, when the NSUN has no mechanism for making treaties - all we can do is pass resolutions, which are absolutely binding (though the fact that you use "urges" and "recommends" means that nations can choose not to do so).

I'm not even sure if the way you're doing this is legal. Have a look at some of the previously passed resolutions at http://www.nationstates.net/25222/page=UN_past_resolutions (the later ones are, in general, better formatted and better represent the standard that is generally currently expected), the proposal rules at http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=420465 and some of the threads linked here: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=412468 especially Sophista's excellent guide http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8681196&postcount=3 (I've found the formatting guide -the second half - to be very useful).

I'm going to go through each clause with comments:

UNDERSTANDING that the use of drugs is not healthy for the human corpse;
I would suggest "body", as many people tend to think corpse = dead.

ALSO UNDERSTANDING that there are already drugs on the Western market,
Don't use "Western", it's illegal as a real-life reference.

under the name of alcohol (which is proved to be a hard drug similar to opium)
It is?
and nicotin (which is a natural substance in the tobacco plant and is proved to be a soft drug and which is also proved to be one of the most addicting drugs);
Misspelled "nicotine", and I was under the impression that other drugs such as methamphetamine are far more addicting than nicotine is.

EMPHASIZING that the use of drugs is a persons own decision (like persons can also choose to drink alcohol, or smoke tobacco) and if its been outlawed, personal freedom will be
affected;
This looks OK, but you must consider that in order for people to use them, there must be people to sell them, and they may put undue pressure on those who don't want to use drugs.

NOTING WITH REGRET that still many country's have drug laws that prohibit the use of drugs, so that personal freedom has already been affected for a long time;
I would take out the "with regret" in the heading. You'll win a lot more flies with honey than with vinegar, and this kind of attacks drug-free nations.

1. URGES the UN to bring forth a new treaty in which the specifications on internationallegalization of drugs will be written;
Why? Why don't you just write it in this resolution?

2. RECOMMENDS the UN to add in this treaty, the restriction of the use of drugs to indicated areas, such as peoples own homes;
This seems like something that individual countries would want to do. You're kind of micromanaging a bit: first saying that we should have drugs, but we should limit them. What if a country wants to legalize all drugs in all cases?

3. FURTHER URGES all member nations to sign and ratify the treaty, as stated in operative clause one;
See comment on op clause one.

4. ASKS for the creation of a new UN organ, which will be called the UNOGLD (United Nations Organization on Global Legalization of Drugs), which tasks will be:

Why "ASKS"? Why not "CREATES"?

a. to control all nations, that have signed the treaty, as
stated in operative clause one, on the ratification of
the treaty;
b. to give aid, to country's that need this aid, by means
of, but not limited to:
i sending specialists on the area of political
issues, like this issue, in order to aid country's
in the legislation of the legalization of drugs;
ii encouraging and aiding country's in the making, or
building, of distribution centres, where everybody
of or over the age of 18 can buy soft drugs
(excluding tobacco) and everybody of or over the
age of 21 can buy hard drugs (excluding alcohol);

Most countries are easier with tobacco and alcohol, not harder.

iii aiding country's in the help of persons with drugs
addictions;

5. TRUSTS that the number of persons with drugs addictions will stagnate or even decrease, since the excitement of the use of drugs will be gone, so that less people will try it and get addicted.
Yes, but if the government legalizes them, then it would look like the government was sponsoring them, and then people might use them more. Just a thought. ;)

I don't really support this, but I'll help because I think it could turn into something I could support. I'll add more later.

As an example, if I were to re-write your drugs proposal, I'd do something like this (please note, this is for demonstration purposes, and more a format guide than a content guide - it isn't good enough for submission as a real proposal, as not all of the problems have been addressed):

The General Assembly of the United Nations,

DEFINING recreational drugs as ... ,

FURTHER DEFINING hard drugs as ... and soft drugs as all other recreational drugs,

UNDERSTANDING that the use of most recreational drugs carries significant health risks for the human body or mind,

NOTING that alcohol (which, would under the definitions above, be classed as a hard drug) and nicotine (which, would under the definitions above, be classed as a soft drug, and is highly addictive) are legally availably in a large number of UN member nations,

EMPHASIZING that the use of any recreational drugs is a persons own decision and outlawing them is an affront to personal freedom,

NOTING WITH REGRET that still many country's have drug laws that prohibit the use of drugs, so that personal freedom has already been affected for a long time,

BELIEVES that, with legalisation, the number of persons with drugs addictions will stagnate or even decrease, since the excitement of the use of drugs will be gone, so that less people will try it and get addicted,

1. URGES/REQUIRES (I'm not sure which you want to do) all member nations to legalise the consumption of recreational drugs for adult citizens;

2. RECOMMENDS that nations implement age restrictions for different drugs appropriate to their status as hard or soft;

3. RECOMMENDS that nations restrict the use of drugs to the following areas:
a) private homes
b) ...
c) ...

4. ESTABLISHES a new UN organ, which will be called the UNOGLD (United Nations Organization for the Global Legalization of Drugs), which will give aid to countries that need help following this resolution, by means of, but not limited to:
a) sending specialists on the area of political issues, like this issue, in order to aid countries in legislating the legalization of drugs;
b) encouraging and aiding the creation of distribution centres, where recreational drugs may be purchased by people who satisfy the appropriate age limits;
c) aiding countries in the help of persons with drugs addictions.

That deals with the mechanism and a few issues (e.g. you don't need an enforcement mechanism, the UN does this automatically) but the proposal isn't perfect. For instance, I wouldn't bother with the UNOGLD. Its duties are pretty open-ended and you haven't explained how it is funded or controlled.

Basically, if you want to do things, you have to include the details in your proposal. You can't just ask the UN to write a treaty and sort out the specifics then.

Dude, You cant just leggalize everything. Drug use will not stagnate or decreas. I live in the Netherlands i know. We only allow some sorts of drugs in some measures. Its like a compremise to prevent the creation of a maffia underworld. And because the police is not strickt enough on these rules its turning out to be a desaster. Have you thought of the emount of money the goverment spents on healthcosts and what it would look like if everywone is smoking weed on the street when you said the use of any recreational drugs is a persons own decision and outlawing them is an affront to personal freedom. We already have a large smokingproblem. This reso wont do any good.

i'd oppose this!

my nation wholey agrees with the concept of leagalising drugs, and currenty we have no drug laws..... but, i don't think this is something that UN should decide, i think it comes down to the nation itself, and should be adressed as an issue by them, not forced upon them by a higher body such as the UN....

like i said, i would oppose

I must ask, is this truly a UN issue? Has a proposal banning drugs been passed before? Because, if not, I find this rather redundant, and none of the UN's business.

Has a proposal banning drugs been passed before?.
Despite the fact that there has been a UN proposal category for Recreational Drug Use in place since the game started, no one has ever successfully passed a UN resolution about it, pro or con.ALL DRUGS SUCK. ALL DRUG USERS SHOULD BE PUT TO DEATH IMMEDIATELY! Aspirin, Viagra, heroin, hydrocortisone, Claritin, THEY'RE ALL THE SAME.

KILL THE DAMN USERS!

The preceeding fanaticism brought to you by the Nationstates Pharmaceutical Council. Better living through chemical maipulation!

Despite the fact that there has been a UN proposal category for Recreational Drug Use in place since the game started, no one has ever successfully passed a UN resolution about it, pro or con.ALL DRUGS SUCK. ALL DRUG USERS SHOULD BE PUT TO DEATH IMMEDIATELY! Aspirin, Viagra, heroin, hydrocortisone, Claritin, THEY'RE ALL THE SAME.

KILL THE DAMN USERS!

The preceeding fanaticism brought to you by the Nationstates Pharmaceutical Council. Better living through chemical maipulation!

Sounds like someone's been popping the happy pills a few too many times.:)

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

It's doubtful that Yelda would ever support a resolution legalizing recreational drugs. We wouldn't support one that outlawed them either. What me might support is a resolution which affirmed the right of national governments to make that decision.

I'm quite content with our drug laws thank-you very much. So on principle I'll vote against, and then in regards to this specific proposal, I'll definitley not vote for it because the writing of it has a lot of holes and would leave a lot of loopholes open (not that there is anything wrong with that from my point of view).

The Kingdom of Arrogant Genii would support any resolution that relaxes the UN's approach towards drugs but i think the resolution needs to be better written.

Dude, You cant just leggalize everything. Drug use will not stagnate or decreas. I live in the Netherlands i know. We only allow some sorts of drugs in some measures. Its like a compremise to prevent the creation of a maffia underworld. And because the police is not strickt enough on these rules its turning out to be a desaster. Have you thought of the emount of money the goverment spents on healthcosts and what it would look like if everywone is smoking weed on the street when you said the use of any recreational drugs is a persons own decision and outlawing them is an affront to personal freedom. We already have a large smokingproblem. This reso wont do any good.

Have you ever thought of the amount of money the government spends on hunting down drug users, dealers, and the the associated organised criminals, trying them, and locking them away? On dealing with the gun crime fuelled by the drugs trade? On dealing with the acquistive crimes committed by addicts driven by artificially inflated prohibition prices? On treating people made ill because their unscrupulous criminal dealer cut their drugs with all kinds of rubbish or sold them a completely different pill?

OOC: Incidentally, if you want to bring the example of the Netherlands into this, although I personally believe that full legalisation would probably lead to an overall increase in drug use (but perhaps more drug use would be relatively safe and responsible), it's interesting to note this, from New Scientist on 26 March 2005, given that cannabis use is decriminalised in the Netherlands, with it illegal to sell to under-18s:

http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/archive/2492/24921301.jpg

Look, the way I see it, this is a resolution that makes the legalization of drugs mandatory. I find that to be unreasonable. It should be a cultural, not a political, decision.

And, I hasten to say, what if this turns out to be a flop? What if all of a sudden you wanted to make drugs illegal again?

Cal Labone wouldn't be awfully happy about that, you know?

Look, the way I see it, this is a resolution that makes the legalization of drugs mandatory. I find that to be unreasonable. It should be a cultural, not a political, decision.

What exactly is that supposed to mean? Do you mean rather that the decision should be a local one respecting local culture, rather than one made at the level of the UN? If so, why should an individual's right to sovereignty over his/her own body be abrogated merely because s/he happens to live in a society oppressive enough that it doesn't even respect an adult's ownership of his/her body?

And, I hasten to say, what if this turns out to be a flop? What if all of a sudden you wanted to make drugs illegal again?

That could be said of any governmental action. _Myopia_ is perfectly happy with its drugs policy, which hasn't included prohibition since the nation was founded.