Well put! And OUCH! That's a painful mental exercise, considering my left leg.
This is a ch__ch. What's missing?
Posted on 03/28/2006 10:51:21 PM PST by goldstategop
Getting high can be bad. Putting people in prison for it is worse. And doing the latter doesn't stop the former.
I was once among the majority who believe that drug use must be illegal. But then I noticed that when vice laws conflict with the law of supply and demand, the conflict is ugly, and the law of supply and demand generally wins.
The drug war costs taxpayers about $40 billion. "Up to three quarters of our budget can somehow be traced back to fighting this war on drugs," said Jerry Oliver, then chief of police in Detroit, told me. Yet the drugs are as available as ever.
Oliver was once a big believer in the war. Not anymore. "It's insanity to keep doing the same thing over and over again," he says. "If we did not have this drug war going on, we could spend more time going after robbers and rapists and burglars and murderers. That's what we really should be geared up to do. Clearly we're losing the war on drugs in this country."
No, we're "winning," according to the federal Drug Enforcement Administration, which might get less money if people thought it was losing. Prosecutors hold news conferences announcing the "biggest seizure ever." But what they confiscate makes little difference. We can't even keep drugs out of prisons -- do we really think we can keep them out of all of America?
Even as the drug war fails to reduce the drug supply, many argue that there are still moral reasons to fight the war. "When we fight against drugs, we fight for the souls of our fellow Americans," said President Bush. But the war destroys American souls, too. America locks up a higher percentage of her people than almost any other country. Nearly 4,000 people are arrested every day for mere possession of drugs. That's more people than are arrested for aggravated assault, burglary, vandalism, forcible rape and murder combined.
Authorities say that warns people not to mess with drugs, and that's a critical message to send to America's children. "Protecting the children" has justified many intrusive expansions of government power. Who wants to argue against protecting children?
I have teenage kids. My first instinct is to be glad cocaine and heroin are illegal. It means my kids can't trot down to the local drugstore to buy something that gets them high. Maybe that would deter them.
Or maybe not. The law certainly doesn't prevent them from getting the drugs. Kids say illegal drugs are no harder to get than alcohol.
Perhaps a certain percentage of Americans will use or abuse drugs -- no matter what the law says.
I cannot know. What I do know now, however, are some of the unintended consequences of drug prohibition:
1. More crime. Rarely do people get high and then run out to commit crimes. Most "drug crime" happens because the product is illegal. Since drug sellers can't rely on the police to protect their property, they form gangs and arm themselves. Drug buyers steal to pay the high black market prices. The government says alcohol is as addictive as heroin, but no one is knocking over 7-Elevens to get Budweiser.
2. More terrorism. The profits of the drug trade fund terrorists from Afghanistan to Colombia. Our herbicide-spraying planes teach South American farmers to hate America.
3. Richer criminal gangs. Alcohol prohibition created Al Capone. The gangs drug prohibition is creating are even richer, probably rich enough to buy nuclear weapons. Osama bin Laden was funded partly by drug money.
Government's declaring drugs illegal doesn't mean people can't get them. It just creates a black market, where even nastier things happen. That's why I have come to think that although drug addiction is bad, the drug war is worse.
Close the border. Stop most Cocaine and Heroin from coming in. Meth and pot will still be produced locally.
Plus we get great buys at police auctions from druggies who like big houses, bid cars, boats, planes all at rock bottom prices!!!!
Well put! And OUCH! That's a painful mental exercise, considering my left leg.
This is a ch__ch. What's missing?
I have nothing against that, i.e tax breaks would be a good idea.
I have nothing against the carrot approach in developing a better society.
Its the stick part I have problems with.
I see nothing wrong with encouraging people to engage with society in a productive healthy way.
And while I agree there is a common good, and a need to enforce that, I believe we have to be careful where we draw the lines and enforcing laws to regulate people morals such as self drug abuse , using prostitution gambling I don't agree with.
Although I see nothing wrong with Church getting involved to help those who are weak.
I don't see it as the responsibility of the government
Plus we get great buys at police auctions from druggies who like big houses, bid cars, boats, planes all at rock bottom prices!!!!
Except that with 80% of the property seized no person is ever charged or convicted of a crime. It's called theft. Except when it's done in the name of the WOD it's legal theft.
You'll find plenty of 'do gooders' who prefer the nanny-state over individual freedom. And you'll find some of them in this very forum...curiously though, not many will have the courage to post to this thread.
Why don't we just make Demerol and morphine an over-the-counter choice like cough medicine?
Who are WE to tell anyone else how stoned they can get or to limit their intake of powerful narcotics, the excessive use of which can kill someone very quickly?
There is a cost to drug use and there are real physical threats to all of us because of the drug impairment of others.
The habitual use of drugs is NOT a victimless crime and it imposes huge social and economic burdens on society.
The tired arguments against the war on drugs IMPLY NO DOWNSIDE to removing all barriers to drug use. THAT IS A BIG LIE!
So, if we make drugs legal, do we have LESS drug use? Do we have FEWER impaired drivers on the highways next to us? Do those who work in dangerous occupations, construction, for example, have FEWER fellow workers working carelessly around them? Do we have FEWER parents who cannot supervise or raise children because they are strung out on dope? Do we have FEWER emergency room admissions for overdoses? Do we have FEWER school children using drugs?
So, if we make drugs alcohol legal, do we have LESS drugs alcohol use? Do we have FEWER impaired drivers on the highways next to us? Do those who work in dangerous occupations, construction, for example, have FEWER fellow workers working carelessly around them? Do we have FEWER parents who cannot supervise or raise children because they are strung out on dope alcohol ? Do we have FEWER emergency room admissions for overdoses? Do we have FEWER school children using drugs alcohol?
There is a cost to drug use and there are real physical threats to all of us because of the drug impairment of others.
There is a cost to drugs alcohol use and there are real physical threats to all of us because of the drugs alcohol impairment of others.
The habitual use of drugs is NOT a victimless crime and it imposes huge social and economic burdens on society.
The habitual use of drugs alcohol is NOT a victimless crime and it imposes huge social and economic burdens on society.
The tired arguments against the war on drugs IMPLY NO DOWNSIDE to removing all barriers to drug use. THAT IS A BIG LIE!
The tired arguments against the war on drugs alcohol IMPLY NO DOWNSIDE to removing all barriers to drugs alcohol use. THAT IS A BIG LIE!
Almost everything has a down side and an upside. What imbecile would argue otherwise? The down side of alcohol prohibition was worse than the down side of ending alcohol prohibition. The downside of the WOD is worse than the down side of ending the WOD.
The money spend on fighting the WOD, keeping users incarcerated, and their legal defenses could be reallocated to prevention and rehab programs; it is a large chunk of change.
The crime alone that is perpetrated when rival gangs fight over selling territory is worth reducing by eliminating the risk/reward ratios that head dealers (and their underlings who try and impress them with loyalty through random killings) that they prosper from. There is a very good reason why there had to be the 21st amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Because, culturally, they are way different. Now, if you want to go live in an authoritarian semi-dictatorship - go ahead. Don't turn THIS country into one.
Amsterdams drug use is about the same as the USA.
Driving...now THERE is a REAL public health problem...pollution, cancerous by-products of gas production. Hundreds of thousands of deaths and life-changing injuries from accidents- ban the automobiles!!
See...you can make that claim for ANYTHING. EVERYTHING is a public health problem IF IT IS ABUSED. Not all drug use is "drug abuse" any more than all drinking is alchoholism. SOME people are able to use drugs responsibly. Who in THE HELL are you to tell them they can't...ie who died and appointed YOU Elvis. That is why your "personal crusade" is stupid and could only be supported by someone with ABSOLUTELY no logic functions - working on pure emotion you are....
There's always hope. Bush is embracing legalization on the immigration front. Maybe drugs are next.
Today the British newspaper did a story on Whitney Houston.
She has money, fame and talent. She is a mess. She is a crackhead. Addiction is killing her. She has drugs readly available to her and failed attempts at rahabilitation. Drugs are a scourge but the crimes committed by users to get them would not be there is there was a way to cut out the middle man dealer. I was 100% for the drug war. I am now convinced it is a waste of time. How it should be handled is up to experts. The drug enforcement folks cannot stop the flow. The streets of Philadelphia are running with blood because of the drugs. I hope they find a solution soon.
We're not winning the war on murder: let's get rid of police homicide units, and stop persecuting people with a homicidal lifestyle! Waste of money.
We're not winning the war on property crimes. Let's get rid of police property crimes units, and abolish private property! Power to the people!
"It is better to sit in silence and be thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt." -- Mark Twain
I'm thinking the FBI wouldn't have many of them.
But yes, generally agree with the thinking.
At the federal level, it's about 50-50.
Nearly 4,000 people are arrested every day for drunk driving. And alcohol is legal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.