War on Drugs is producing casualties, but not victories

ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH ^ | Sunday, Mar. 12 2006 | By Bill McClellan

[CheyennePress]

Okay, point made. But the disingenuous headline is a bit annoying. There absolutely have been victories in the war on drugs. They're even less conspicuous than military victories in Iraq, so they get reported even less.

[Creationist]

Legalized cocaine would have made the out come different how?

[rawcatslyentist]

">"Legalized cocaine would have made the out come different how?"

They all would be dead from OD instead of just one from a bullet. But the good news is the reduction in the ammount of innocent children catching drive by bullets would be really reduced!

[SittinYonder]

There absolutely have been victories in the war on drugs.

What victories?

[SittinYonder]

Legalized cocaine would have made the out come different how?

There wouldn't have been an outcome because the scenario wouldn't have happened.

[SittinYonder]

Pinging just in case you have any interest ...

[Smokin' Joe]

Last time I checked, people were getting killed when legal stuff was taken from them in robberies, too--or the robbers were. This was a setup and a robbery, not drug use per se.

[Wally_Kalbacken]

I hear you on that - the number of arrests which feature meth possession her in Cherokee County - NW edge of metro Atlanta - is astonishing. We recently had the assistant County Coroner and three members of his family arrested for dealing meth. The costs are staggering. I'm not in the least bit suggesting that legalization is the answer - or that we should step back from vigorous pursuit of drug dealers/producers. But the magnitude of the problem, particularly in places where it shouldn't be, is disheartening.

[eyespysomething]

I don't know if I can do an anti-WOD tonight. I'm caught up arguing whether I'm a racist or not because I tend to have supported the Dubai ports deal. Yes, that makes me a racist. Go figure.

Besides, in a war, aren't there supposed to be dead bodies? We need to start killing people or we aren't going to win this war.

And what about the war on poverty?

BTW - I didn't read the article, so I have no idea what I'm talking about.

[SittinYonder]

I'm not in the least bit suggesting that legalization is the answer - or that we should step back from vigorous pursuit of drug dealers/producers.

We've declared WAR on drugs. If we're serious, particularly in light of the fact that the WOD has failed to curb either the demand or the supply, then we have only two choices: Legalization or impose the death penalty for possession of illegal drugs. You can't win a war without piling up some bodies.

[SittinYonder]

Last time I checked, people were getting killed when legal stuff was taken from them in robberies, too--or the robbers were. This was a setup and a robbery, not drug use per se.

From the article ... Consider, too, the murder of Jacob Bowers. Why would he want to rob a drug dealer? First of all, a drug dealer can't report the crime. Second, he might have cash. And so we have these little shootouts.

The point is, they sought to rob a drug dealer because drugs are illegal. If drugs were legal, this scenario wouldn't have happened.

[Creationist]

So the two still would not have robbed him for cocaine.

Or where do they get the money to purchase the cocaine

Oh tax me more so people who wish to go through life in a blind stuper can get high for free.

Yea so they will not bother others if it is just given away no crime unless they need more than their usual dose.
Put God back into the public systems as it was before the 60's and you will see that a great majority will not wish to hide from their fears of the world in a drug induce coma.

[SittinYonder]

And what about the war on poverty?

Kill the homeless.

I'm caught up arguing whether I'm a racist or not

You're not.

I don't know if I can do an anti-WOD tonight

There's more potential for fun here.

[SittinYonder]

Oh tax me more so people who wish to go through life in a blind stuper can get high for free.

You can take back your straw man, nobody's advocating giving drugs to druggies. I suspect you and I will not find any common ground on this issue if you can't understand that the reason they sought to rob this guy was because, as someone engaged in illegal activity, he could not report it to the police.

[eyespysomething]

Oh tax me more so people who wish to go through life in a blind stuper can get high for free.

As opposed to tax me more so non-violent Americans can be terrorized by law enforcement because, well, they can.

[Smokin' Joe]

If drugs were legal, this scenario wouldn't have happened.

Anything of value can be a motive for robbery. Rolex watches, jewelry, apparent wealth, credit cards, cash, the list goes on. Note from the article that they were after cash, too, and that is when the gunplay started.

Sorry, legalizing something does not remove it from being a target for robbery. People rob liquor stores every day. I'm not buying it.

[Creationist]

How long does one do cocaine and not become non violent?

How long does one do meth and not become non violent?

If you think legalizing these drugs will reduce violence you must live in Hollywood.

The odds are greater for violence from use than not.

[SittinYonder]

If drugs were legal, this scenario wouldn't have happened. It's possible these thugs would have robbed a cocaine store if drugs were legal, but there wouldn't have been any behind-the-store deals like what's described here.

Surely you have some familiarity with the period of American history where alcohol was made unconstitutional. It's accepted fact that prohibition was an utter failure. Why is the prohibition of drugs different?

[SittinYonder]

If you think legalizing these drugs will reduce violence you must live in Hollywood.

If someone commits a crime while taking drugs they can be prosecuted for that crime. Taking the drugs should not be a crime.