Totally has nothing to do with, I don't know drugs being highly destructive (often lethal) addictive substances. Meth, Heroin, and Cocaine are definitely illegal because "there is a war against civil liberties in regards to altered states of consciousness". Just go fast or smoke pot (legal in a lot of places now or not police enforced) or better yet meditate (instead of looking for quick destructive fix to get to same state) if thats what you want.
You're right, it has nothing to do with Strategus, but it's still a war taking place in North America, haha. If meth, heroin, and cocaine were outlawed due purely to harm reduction (considering the study published in 2010 in The Lancet, Drug harms in the UK: a multicriteria decision analysis, for one), then alcohol and tobacco would be illegal too. Clearly that's not the case. If we're considering potential harm to self and others, the top five substances, almost always in this order, are: alcohol, heroin, crack form of cocaine, methamphetamine, cocaine (then tobacco). Heroin/meth/crack/coke are more likely to cause harm to the user than alcohol, but alcohol is pretty close and is much more likely to cause harm to others due to the use of it. Even considering that the aforementioned study is affected by the case of alcohol and tobaccos legality, one must admit that it is likely more of a danger or at least an equal danger to cannabis, and some schedule I substances are safer than either.
Still, even making the more heinous of substances illegal causes more harm than good by way of making criminals out of citizens rather than educating them and allowing them to make their own informed choices as we have done with alcohol and tobacco. A lack of regulation by making substances criminal also paves the way for untaxed money to be made by distributors who may adulterate their products, causing further chances for harm to users, who are going to use whether or not said substances are illegal- legality doesn't effect the percentage of users in a population in a major way in the long run, from what we've seen in countries and areas that have decrminalized substances previously illegal. For the record, I've never done meth, heroin, cocaine, and I never would due to their addictive qualities and potential detriments to health- this is also why I typically refrain from alcohol. I can and do agree that these substances, at least, have a high chance for destruction and harm.
In terms of potential harm to self and other, some of the highest scheduled drugs in America, the psychedelic substances such as psilocybin (found in many species of mushrooms) and LSD are ironically some of the safest for consumption- low chance for physical damage, low chance for overdose, low chance for lasting negative effects, extremely low chance for addiction, do some research and see for yourself. They were outlawed under the Nixon administration due to "cultural hysteria" and propaganda against them. Moreover, this was intimately tied to social activism- many activists were using these substances, and could not be imprisoned for their activism. Maybe I'm just cynical. It's a joke that they're Schedule I (No benefits; no medical applications- there was not enough information to claim this at the time of their scheduling, but can now be said to be an outright lie as around the world more and more applications and potential applications are being discovered and explored).
What's more, unlike alcohol prohibition, no amendment was made to the constitution in their case. Pretty ridiculous, man, you've got to admit, that a person can go to prison for a longer sentence than a murderer or rapist for possessing an amount of mushrooms
not even suitable for a psychedelic experience. You can get five years in prison for having a gram (there are some places, thankfully, where they'll just fine you and confiscate it- this also depends on the officer, of course), which, on average, will only have the effect of improving visual acuity. That is utterly fucked up. Whether or not you would ever deign to use these substances, you have to admit that there is a level of absurdity in the system we have arranged here. Imagine if you could be sent to prison for years for the possession of a thimble full of ginger (in relation to sub-psychedelic amounts of substances this is an easy comparison).
Some people prefer meditation to reach visionary states, and for some, with practice, they achieve it- others prefer to ingest a fungus readily metabolized by our bodies to reach visionary states, and, with forty minutes of waiting, they achieve it. Moreover, the practice of meditation is, in my own experience (the last of which was over five years ago, now) as well as the experience of others who have actually experimented with these substances in a respectful manner, only enhanced by the introduction of compounds such as mescaline, psilocybin, LSD and salvinorin a. If I, as an informed adult citizen of the United States of America, do not have the right to alter my consciousness as I see fit- knowing well the risks and benefits, as anyone who consumes alcohol or, hell, drives a vehicle does- then the game isn't worth the candle, and it opens the door for a further violations of our collective civil liberties.
Sorry for the wall of text, but I am extremely passionate about this, and feel that a large portion of the population is either uninformed or misinformed when it comes to mind altering substances. At the very least we need to seriously consider decriminalization, because the only people who truly benefit from illegal substances by virtue of their being illegal (important to note) are prison operators, law enforcement (in terms of federal funding- Minnesota police fought tooth and nail to keep medical marijuana illegal here in plant form just recently), and dealers/crime syndicates/cartels.
