Hasbeen,

You mean similar to how the U.S. government poisoned alcohol during the prohibition era?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/feb/26/war-on-drugs-prohibition

http://www.slate.com/id/2245188

Or perhaps similar to how heroin is contaminated with Anthrax in the UK?

http://www.journal-online.co.uk/article/6285-anthrax-outbreak-seven-reasons-to-get-radical

The tragedy of the criminalisation and official vilification of some drugs - nb. those generally easier to produce by cottage industry - vs officially sanctioned pharmaceuticals - nb. generally produced in expensive laboratory processes - is the higher number of lives that prohibition has destroyed by the encouragement of an outsider lifestyle subculture, enticement of high profits and dangers of imprisonment.
The misinformation and blanket hysteria of official drug education draws more people into risky drug use than it dissuades. Better that young people were educated intelligently, with programs such as the ABC's series, 'What's Your Poison', which presented a more reasoned description of the negative and positive effects of these substances.
In my experience, the majority of recreational drug users lead functional lives, endangered mostly by their exposure to that illicit subculture. Most dysfunctional addictions mask unaddressed psychological conditions such as anxiety or obsessive-compulsive disorders.
Along with the dangers of prison - in the 80s I knew one young man doing time for cannabis possession who was stabbed to death, another who became a heroin addict and died of HIV. Perhaps the greatest danger caused by law enforcement has been a proliferation of hydroponic marihuana. When infrared air surveillance drove marihuana production indoors it inadvertently sophisticated the growing processes that have produced a much, much more dangerous substance. And surveillance on importation has reduced access to higher quality substances and encouraged backyard laboratories that produce much more dangerous chemical substances.
Ultimately, young people will always adventure, test their boundaries. Most will survive relatively unscathed and wiser for their experience, some will not. Rather than put the majority at risk for the sake of these few, it would be far better to increase early diagnosis and treatment of psychological vulnerabilities and provide intelligent education of the potentialities of playing Russian Roulette with their most precious possession, their brain, then let them make their own choices.

pelican: "The issue is that drug cartels will still find a market among newer unregistered users or first time thrill seekers."

You state that as if it is a fact. You know what the current Australian government take on tobacco is? $6.7 Billion in 2006. (From http://www.aihw.gov.au/publications/phe/soduia06/soduia06.pdf , page x, 4th para) Yet the drug cartels don't move in.

pelican: "In some places higher taxes on cigarettes works in reducing uptake but this also increases the illegal trade, particularly but not confined to, the developing world."

You have repeatedly made what appear to be statements of fact, but are really just wild arsed guesses that happen to support your viewpoint. I don't know which this is as you don't cite evidence supporting it. But assuming it is true, I guess it means legalising drugs would not work as well in the developing world as it would here.

rstuart

I suppose by comparison you think your views are not wild arsed guesses. If you want to play the person instead of the ball then that is up to you but I won't play that game.

My posts are my views but they are based on my own experience in the health/community sector and various experience within government across a number of different portfolios.

You are free to google tobacco smuggling, effects of various drugs including the most current research (there is a mix of research some of it contradictory) and any other relevant string relevant to this topic and draw your own conclusions. I generally try not to post links on OLO because frankly you can always find some paper or some news article that supports both sides of a debate.

Your claims and assertions and those of others are equally written as if fact. I suspect if I had agreed with you my writings would be taken in an entirely different view.

This is an opinion site. They are MY views and I don't claim to be always right and try to keep an open mind - perhaps you should try it.

Really Strayan. Opps, I must stop sticking my tongue in my cheek, it gets me into so much trouble.

I'm a fairly hard hearted bugger. I have very little sympathy for those who break their head, falling off their trail bike, horse, or boat. I can see no reason why the public should pick up the pieces. Incidently, we do, or have done all three, without public cost.

I can see no reason, where drugs are concerned either.

They should be available, on prescription for a reasonable price for those hooked, but that's all.

It always amuses me that it seems that it's those who complain most about tobaco smoking, want to make hemp smoking common.

I do get upset when I hear of so called needle exchange people handing out needles, so they can be left around for kids to stand on.

We are an irational lot.

I write from extensive experience with that illicit subculture, sufficient to assert that most drugs are not all they are cracked up to be. Without the seedy glamma of its dangers and high profits, it is my informed opinion that a significant proportion of users would neither enjoy nor progress past their first experience, and few would be bothered dealing beyond personal use requirements.
I recall a Psychology experiment from the 70s, where groups of subjects were provided with a substance and informed it was one of a number of drugs, and guess what? Those thinking they were taking heroin reported heroin-type effects, likewise those of cocaine, THC and methedrine, when what all groups actually ingested was adrenaline.
The human mind is a marvelous fantasist, creating narrative drama around its experience, and that's how the drug culture comes about - mostly through the dangers of its illegality.
Of those who actually enjoy their drug of choice, many people wealthy enough to access clean heroin, and those assiduous enough to find open-range marihuana, conduct perfectly functional lives. However, dirty or unpredictable strength heroin causes many ODs and super-strength hydro has brought about a new class of addicts with psychotic disorders that need treatment.
The physical symptoms of heroin addiction are really not that difficult to abate, a week of medically monitored discomfort at the most, but the social and habitual patterns are much harder. Far better that those addicts were treated for their underlying disorders than given needles or methadone and let get on with it.