Posted on 04/15/2006 2:21:22 PM PDT by Know your rights
SCOTTISH police officers have sparked anger after calling for the legalisation of all drugs - including heroin and cocaine.
The Strathclyde Police Federation has called for a dramatic change of direction in the battle on drugs crime, and the issue will be debated later this month.
The body, which represents 7000 officers, is set to argue that all drugs should be licensed in the same way as cigarettes and alcohol. Officers claim this would cut drug deaths and divert police resources to other crime-fighting priorities. It is the first time that an organisation representing officers has made such a demand.
Opponents today said the move would only increase the availability of drugs. But the federation believes millions of pounds are wasted on enforcing existing laws, with little impact on the availability of drugs on the street.
Inspector Jim Duffy, chairman of the federation, said: "We are not winning the war against drugs and we need to think about different ways to tackle it."
The Scottish Executive said that drug legislation is reserved to Westminster.
You sound like a Jack Chick tract.
Like I said, then don't ask for a religious source of our laws.
That's exactly the problem; anyone not violating the natural rights of others (nor posing clear and present danger of such violation) shouldn't be pushed around at all by anyone.
Tough beans. Who ever promised any state that they could effectively enforce any damn-fool law that entered their heads?
Have any evidence, or are we supposed to just take your word for it?
Regulation, licensing and control necessarily entail the use, to one degree or the other, of LEO.
In the end recombinant DNA technology is going to take care of the problem of "natural herbs" by allowing for the displacement of the crops you have come to know by those which turn into alcohol if heated to 180 degrees (due to an enzyme produced by the modified genome).
We know how to handle alcohol if not MJ.
So turning the drug legalization decision over to the individual states, therefore, would be pointless. Why, then, do you support this approach?
You want his name, or what?
None whatsoever, in that it's a philosphical libertarian approach to writing laws, having no connection to history or reality.
BUT, if you buy into it, MrLeRoy's job to convince you to legalize his precious drugs is that much easier.
What you mean after, square? Free drugs, free crib, free food, free condoms, free sex, NOW, NOW, NOW dude!
Reduce them to chewing and swallowing the stuff ~ no smoking allowed or it's a Richard Pryor "head trip" first ~ running downhill with their hair on fire sort of thing.
Why couldn't that same technology be used to say, create a THC producing tomato? Or coca producing Kudzoo?
Recombinant DNA tech is expensive.
Cartels' could muster a large R&D budget.
There's nothing cool about a narcotrafficante.
Oh, no doubt about that. However, if faced with extinction by a 'silver bullet' technology such as you are describing, the multi-billion dollar industry (the people at the top of it anyway) would probably commit significant resources to overcoming the technology.
If fields are burned, the narcotrafficantes suffer no loss.
We'll have the new seed, weed and bush in place, growing invisibly among the old stuff before these guys catch on.
I suppose a sign of a bad crop would be if we stopped using herbicides on it.
Maybe I am just overestimating the intel gathering capabilities of these organizations (Too much TV! =P)
So you think we should have a declaration of war, and deploy the military to the streets to engage the enemy?
"Certain types"? Pray tell what types of "commerce" does your interpretation of the Commerce Clause preclude Congress from regulating?
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.