[DiogenesLamp]

"to the moral obscenity that is the war on drugs. "

What would be an even greater moral obscenity is the millions of deaths which would result by NOT having a war on drugs.

I think you are highlighting this and other abuses to support a false conclusion. A War on drugs is necessary, but excesses and abuses are not. Without a war on drugs, we go the same way China went after the Opium wars; The country is devastated socially and economically, and it collapses. Millions of people die.

What China went through by NOT having a war on drugs is FAR worse than these abuses you point out.

[Chickensoup]

I actually care not whether Obama’s Afghani heroin destroys lives. I do care whether I have to pay for the healthcare of these users.

I think that addicts need to give up healthcare access and hope that the Sallies or Catholic charities come up with some sort of charity care for them.

[Wolfie]

That’s the kind of thinking that leads to bans on large sodas. Same principle. If somebody can make case that something is bad enough, the Gov’t should step in.

[lentulusgracchus]

What China went through by NOT having a war on drugs is FAR worse than these abuses you point out.

Bump. And don't forget, it was all started by the British, to break down China's policy of hard-currency purchases only by foreigners of Chinese consumer nondurables like silk and tea. China refused to import anything but precious metals in payment for her goods.

Addicting China was a cash-flow problem's expedient corrective.