The Responsible Drug User's Oath

• I understand the effects of all recreational drugs I take, to the best of my ability. I shall research the neurochemical, psychological, physiological, spirituality effects, the legal issues surrounding the drug and its use.
• When taking a drug I am inexperienced with, I shall begin with the lowest dose suggested to be psychoactive by the aforementioned research before progressing to higher dosages. I will measure the drug carefully, with an accurate scale.
• If it is possible that the drug may contain harmful adulterants or in fact be a different drug altogether, I shall have the drug chemically analyzed for purity and content.
• I will learn the overdose limits for my own body weight and adjust them for any possible synergistic effects due to diet, prescription or other drugs. I will also adjust for dangerous side effects and my own health condition. After calculating my personal limit, I will stay under 75% of this limit, to minimize risk.
• While under the effects of a drug, I shall not take physical risks such as driving, climbing, swimming, or any other physical activity in which my actions may cause harm to myself or others.
• When first using a drug I am inexperienced with, I shall take it in the company of an experienced user, also known as a spotter. The spotter will remain sober during this experience, and will also have fully researched the drug.
• I shall not attempt to sway, force, trick, or otherwise coerce another person to take any drug; rather, I shall discuss previous drug experiences and research frankly and honestly, allowing all people to make their own personal decisions about drug use.
• I shall defend the rights of others to make educated, responsible decisions about drug use. I shall not support any person or movement that attempts to remove or abridge said rights.
• I shall not allow my drug use to overshadow or disrupt the other important aspects of my life, including social interaction, employment or even other personal pursuits.
• I will also take responsibility for the drug use of friends and relatives, if their drug use becomes dangerous to their health or personal relationships.

I swear this with the hope of creating a society in which safe, responsible drug use is a personal decision, not a criminal offense.

As this is a work in progress, much like all of E2, I've taken one of C-Dawg's suggestions, adding the statement about chemical testing. Anonymous testing companies do exist, and if DanceSafe is any indication, they may well proliferate in the future. As for C-Dawg's statement about taking responsibility for the drug use of friends and family: we live in a society where the mistakes of one drug abuser can hurt the rights of thousands of drug users. If all responsible drug users were carefully aware of the drug use of their friends and family, and tried to step in when problems occured, we could have a much greater effect in saving lives than the entirety of the War On Some Drugs.

• I understand the effects of habituation, and therefore I shall exercise caution and significantly reduce the quantity of any familiar drug I use when taking the drug in a new and different environment for the first time.

This caution is warranted due to the effects of habituation, a form of conditioning not isolated to drug use. The basic theory goes that the environment in which one is accustomed to using a drug eventually stimulates the compensatory response your body makes to the drug. In the absence of the environment as a stimulus, the effect of the drug will then be much greater than one expects. Studies have shown, for example, that most heroin overdoses occur when an addict does his or her normal dose in an unusual environment. For example, someone accustomed to shooting up in their own home might O.D. if they shoot up in the park, even with their normal dose.

This sounds like a good idea, and I applaud George Dorn for suggesting it.
However, I have issues with two of the points:

I will begin with the lowest dosage...
I will measure the drug carefully...

It is not possible for the typical person to accurately promise this.
One of the effects of the War On Some Drugs is that the ultimate consumer can have no assurance that the substance e is ingesting is what it purports to be, nor any recourse if it isn't. Indeed, much of the physical damage inflicted upon the user, and which then foments horror stories, is traceable to the product being impure (laced, cut, or a total impostor). This happens not only through accidents of manufacture, but because it is in the best interests of the producer (wrt legal risks) to pass off a substitute if he can get away with it, and of the distributor (wrt his profit) to dilute it.
Even though someone might say that there is sometimes a slight benefit from this, in that the addiction potential may be decreased relative to the drug in its pure form, the fact is that addiction is not intrinsically harmful, and I would disagree that that balances the dangers posed by some of the contaminants that we see on the street.

I will take responsibility for the drug use of others....

You cannot be responsible for the actions of another, but I applaud your presumed promise to try to get them to stop if they take their use to a dangerous level.

• As a drug consumer, I will embrace responsible drug production and distribution methods, such as growing or pharming your own, and shun suppliers who use violence when not necessary for their self-defense.

Commentary

Of course, if you think beyond the middleman, drugs often do support terrorism...but no more so than oil, diamonds, or indeed, money itself.

Legalizing drugs would help incalculably; I imagine a future multi-national cocaine conglomerate would take a page from the DeBeers marketing department and start competing on the basis that their brand of coke is terror-free!

In the end, we all have to decide as a matter of conscience the extent of the moral implications of our economic behavior. Henry David Thoreau didn't pay a tax because he knew some of it would be used to finance the Mexican War. Did trade and investment in Apartheid-era South Africa prop up an evil system, or did it help that country transform into a democracy? I leave the question as an exercise for the reader...best performed while tending your own garden and hoping for a bountiful, trouble-free harvest.