Heroin should be legalized

1. Overdose My opponent claims that 1% of Heroin addicts die of "true" overdoes. This is false. This statistic includes all deaths labeled as "overdose", even false overdoses. This is explained in the article: "No doubt, some overdoses are a result of mixing heroin with other drugs, but appear to result from a sudden loss of tolerance. Addicts have been killed one day by a dose that was readily tolerated the day before." While this article is interesting and provides useful data, it is inaccurate as demonstrated by the Consumer's Union Report. The Report sets three solid statements regarding alleged Heroin overdose. They are: (1) The deaths cannot be due to overdose. (2) There has never been any evidence that they are due to overdose. (3) There has long been a plethora of evidence demonstrating that they are not due to overdose. According to Deputy Chief Medical Examiner Baden "The majority of deaths are due to an acute reaction to the intravenous injection of the heroin-quinine-sugar mixture. This type of death is often referred to as an 'overdose,' which is a misnomer. Death is not due to a pharmacological overdose in the vast majority of cases." He found that the overwhelming majority of alleged overdoses did not fit the physiological criteria or show the signs of a true opiate overdoes. Rather, he found that many of the deaths resulted from the body reacting to the injected material as if it were going into shock. In many cases, the needles are actually found still inserted into the vein. This does not in any way shape or form resemble an opiate overdose. A true overdoes fatality takes between 1-12 hours to occur, with the physical cause of death usually being respiratory failure. http://www.druglibrary.org... 2. Health Issues / Criminal Activity My opponent claims that people will continue to use injunction as the primary method of choice even if Heroin becomes legal and cheap. There is a very large pool of evidence contradicting this claim. During the Vietnam War, soldier had ready access to very cheap, high quality Heroin. During a period of tolerance in which soldiers were allowed to use the drug, the vast majority did not inject. Over 95% of users snorted or smoked it, with a smaller minority taking it orally or mixing it with drink. Once the military cracked down on Heroin use, things began to change: "The increase in intravenous use," Dr. Zinberg comments, "suggests that perhaps as a result of the Army's righteous efforts to stamp out heroin entirely, the drug scene has turned nastier, with potentially unpleasant consequences. When a widely used drug suddenly becomes difficult to obtain, users will conserve their supplies for the greatest effect." http://druglibrary.org... I would also disagree with my opponents assessment that injection is the "easiest" way to use Heroin. While it is the most efficient, it is NOT the easiest. Even injecting with dangerously poor form requires equipment and practice. Other methods of Heroin use can be done very easily, with the primary downside being the lack of efficiency. If Heroin was legal, this would not be a problem. One pure gram of Heroin costs approximately $10 in a fair market. This same amount would cost roughly $2000 in the black market, despite being diluted and cut numerous times. One can simply consume more Heroin rather than switch to injecting. I'm not sure what my opponent means by the statement "unless the government go completley hands off...". As far as the supply side of Heroin distribution goes, the government should treat Heroin similar to alcohol. 3. Price/Injection My opponent claims that taxpayers would be forced to bear the brunt of people's addictions. I do not see how this could be the case. A single gram of medical grade Heroin can last an addict for days, and only costs ten dollars. Compared to a nicotine addict, the Heroin addict has it made. My opponent also claims that addicts will cycle from less efficient methods to more efficient methods in order to bypass developed tolerance. However, history has shown that addicts will not inject unless the price and availability of Heroin forces them to do so. After all, if what my opponent stated were true, Alcoholics wold be mainlining Alcohol in order to get more drunk. Furthermore, tolerance plateaus, with the average addict plateauing at approximately 350-500 mg per day. At this point, the user will not require any more drug than he did the day before. There is also the claim that we cannot stop the sale of "illegal" Heroin. This argument is pure fantasy and makes no economic sense. There is no way for a dealer to realistically compete with a pharmaceutical distributor. I'm assuming that my opponent believes that an unscrupulous person would buy the drug legally, cut it, and then re-sell it. However, buyers have no incentive to buy from this person. Regardless of the volume of product he is selling, the total amount of actual Heroin being sold is the same, and they have no guarantee of the content. Furthermore, even if one were somehow able to trick people into buying, there is no incentive to enter the market. Black market Heroin markup is over 1000%. Fair market Heroin would be just like any other non patented pharmaceutical. In order to make a living selling Heroin in a legal market, one would need to sell an absurd amount of Heroin every day. If this type of business worked, people would be standing on street corners selling watered down beers to alcoholics. My opponent contests my claim regarding nicotine addiction vs Heroin addiction. I do not feel that this is an important point, as most medical authorities agree that the two come close, even if the particular order of severity is disputed. My opponent seems to be under the belief that I think that Heroin addiction must be treated. I do not believe this at all. Heroin, like most opiates, is within itself a relatively benign drug. Even if one is to become addicted, one can still live a very functional and happy life, especially when compared to those who are addicted to alcohol and cigarettes. The only reason one should be compelled to quit is their own self determination to do so. Heroin usage within itself does not come close to causing the same health effects or social costs as alcohol or cigarettes. In fact, many doctors encouraged seemingly incurable alcoholics to switch to opiates as an alternative to their much more destructive addiction prior to the War on Drugs. http://www.druglibrary.org....