Odd that the amount is omitted.
Yeah! And you know what,
maybe if we gave Muslims
all of the funding
we're spending to fight
terrorism, then maybe
Muslims would like us!
He omitted nothing. You are not paying attention. He said the cost was ten percent.
For what ever amount paid for law enforcement to achieve a certain reduction in drug usage, the same level of reduction can be achieved through noncriminal treatment programs at ninety percent less cost.
Treatment costs only 10% of what enforcement costs for any dollar amount you wish to throw out there.
Better still, no Great Grandmothers need to die.
Just ask yourself a hypothetical question:
If the enormous profits to be made from selling drugs were removed, who is going to go to the trouble of bringing the stuff into this country, and for what reason?
Take the profit out of the equation and the problem will be reduced substantially.
Am I a druggie? No.
I do not use any illicit drugs OR alcohol.
But I am a rational and intelligent person that is able to see that when something hasn't, doesn't, and WON'T work, it is time to try something else.
The per capita addiction rates for this country have remained essentially unchanged since the eary 1800's.
Education and treatment are the areas where money should be spent.
But it was specified ;-)
thats not the program they want to pursue. no neat gadgets,
no subguns, no armored cars to ride around in, no neat
ninja suits or camo fatigues to wear.
we are fighting the war that the drug cops and swat ninjas want to fight, not the one that out to be fought.
they are at war with the citizens, which is why the militarization of police needs to be reversed now!