Ending the Failed War on Drugs

lookingglass · Post by **lookingglass** » Fri Sep 26, 2003 3:55 pm

YOu see that I can agree with.
The thought that we cant beat you because you are too well funded and have more tricks up your sleeve then we can handle. So our point is to take all of the power you possess by making accesable to eveyone that is over 18 and can spend the money on it. We are fighting fire with fire.

I stand here and say that Beer and liquor also cigereets have been availible to me for the past...(Number) of years and I have choosen to not use them and I teach my children and those that I have a influence over the same.
Those substances are legal but harmful at the same time.

This I can agree with and say that you would have my vote...

I hate pot and I have seen the problems that it causes.

There will be some retaliation to the process by some having to give up the biz and look for other jobs.

I am concerned what will be pushed harder on the public and I guess there is no arguement for that; pot being called a gateway drug.

I remember when the gov. of Nm was trying to legalize pot and that did not work.

Who would grow it and market it. I have indian land and we can use some of my lot. LOL...
but wait...

Deep Sea · Post by **Deep Sea** » Sat Sep 27, 2003 12:19 am

The goal isn't just freedom - a main part of the goal is also harm reduction.

...AND...

Because it isn't about drugs. Just like it isn't about helmet laws. It isn't about seatbelt laws. It isn't about guns. It isn't about smoking. It isn't about drinking. It isn't about safety. It isn't about security. It is about FREEDOM.

On the harm reduction part, not too many would give a rat's A' for the college student. He made his decision, it was his choice. He was an adult.

On other side of the fence on the harm reduction part, a lot of young innocent bystanders, kids, are in harms way in drug-infested neighborhoods, and some of them do get shot. Others get involved for various reasons. Like a cancer drugs destroy their lives and the lives of others around them. That's crime.

To me, the three big benefits of drug legalizstion would be crime reduction, Revenue, but most importantly, as Panther puts it, FREEDOM.

Dana Sheets · Post by **Dana Sheets** » Sat Sep 27, 2003 1:48 pm

The parents, grandparents, siblings, cousins, and friends would probably give a little more than a rat's ass about the college student.

The Harm Reduction Coalition
http://www.harmreduction.org/

offers a wealth of information in a rather unorganized website for those interested.

The gentleman who spoke at my church about this effort made two very interesting calls to action that I want to share here.

1. Most people can identify some element of the current war on drugs/US Drug policy that they disagree with and would like to see changed. Whether it is the ability of the government to seize the property of a grandparents who's grandchild is arrested for using drugs on the premises, the ability of the federal government to arrest individuals in possession of State legalized medical marijuana in California, or that the millions of dollars funnelled the D.A.R.E. program are wasted, or that your freedoms are compromised - there is room for advocacy and change on this issue.

2. Take a look at all the issues clamoring for your advocacy and attention and decide how many people are already working on those issues. Drug policy reform has fewer advocates but anyone involved in thos movement could make a real impact. From letter writing to your representatives and your newspaper to encouraging open and honest discussion without retribution about drug abstinence, use, abuse, and addition among your friends, familys, and communities. There is much you could offer.

3. Take the time to be informed about current policies, practices, and barriers to ending the war on drugs and find one that is a good match for what you would like to see changed...and go about changing it.

Dana

benzocaine · Post by **benzocaine** » Sat Sep 27, 2003 3:48 pm

I can appreciate the concerns many people have about decriminalizing illicit drugs. No one is blind to the harm they can cause, and every one knows how they can ruin lives. Some would say that even more people would be hooked on heroin and cocaine since there would be no legal consequences from using them. But they said the same things about booze back in the 1920s.

I would support limited legalization... make pot legal and Taxable... have a legal age of 21 just like alcohol. As for cocaine,heroin, "special K", and many others, keep them illegal. I argue that pot is pretty much harmless. It can be argued that alcohol causes much more damage than pot. Ever hear of people on a pot binge getting violent? Or sclerosis of the liver from pot? Yes, pot isn't completely harmless, and I sure as hell don't want to smoke it. I've seen to many people lulled into complacency and laziness from it. But there are so many people out there who smoke it occasionally to relax or enchance their marital relations, who live totally normal middle American lives. I think it is insane that they could lose everything they own if the DEA found out they were growing a pot plant in their basement.

There' s my opinion. (though no one asked for it

)

Deep Sea · Post by **Deep Sea** » Sat Sep 27, 2003 6:25 pm

Why not make it all legal? supply sterile hypodermics and collect them after usage. Winder what effect actions like that might have on the diseases spread by reuse of needles?

I just don't believe in gooddie-goodie people being effective in the war on drugs. One has to be nasty-nasty to get the nasties.

benzocaine · Post by **benzocaine** » Sat Sep 27, 2003 8:53 pm

Why not make it all legal? supply sterile hypodermics and collect them after usage.

I think that would be a mistake. Cocaine and heroin are extremely addictive. You don't see to many pot heads killing people for a joint..mainly because they don't go through physical withdrawals. Conversely, you hear about crack WH@$%, and people commiting all maner of crimes to get a line or a fix of "coke" or "H".

Deep Sea · Post by **Deep Sea** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 1:12 am

I think that would be a mistake.

Your opinion is alright by me as long as mine is by you.

Cocaine and heroin are extremely addictive.

Those who are going to do any kinds of drugs are going to do them anyway.

You don't see to many pot heads killing people for a joint..mainly because they don't go through physical withdrawals. Conversely, you hear about crack WH@$%, and people commiting all maner of crimes to get a line or a fix of "coke" or "H".

What I figure is because the stuff will be available and in the cheap as well, crime will plumment.

Since your interests are manly n pot, here's a good link if you're interested in the European communities' views:

http://www.hnnsweden.com/sweden.htm

benzocaine · Post by **benzocaine** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 1:02 pm

What I figure is because the stuff will be available and in the cheap as well, crime will plumment.
Since your interests are manly n pot, here's a good link if you're interested in the European communities' views:

I skimmed through the scientific article... couldn't possibly force myself to read 28 chapters of studys and polls. I did however read the conclusion in full. I t mentions .."The Dutch concept of harm reduction and the Swedish concept of a drug free society are contradictory. Reducing harm can be seen as making drug taking less risky, while the struggle for a drug free society often means strong control measures, making life more risky for drug abusers".

It also mentioned... "Some conclusions can be drawn from data on HIV/AIDS among drug addicts. The rate of infected drug addicts is highest in Stockholm and Amsterdam and concerns mainly heroin addicts. The incidence of AIDS cases relating to intravenous drug use decreased in the second half of the 90s and is now described as quite stable".

So I guess some benefits can come from government regulated heroin use. I personally say why not just give the coke and H addicts a gun to blow their brains out.. it's much cheaper and quicker.

I couldn't find very much about pot there. Let me explain to you though... I could care less if pot was legal or not. The only way it affects me is that it costs a hell of a lot of money to enforce drug laws.. thus a bigger chunk out of my paycheck.

Your opinion is alright by me as long as mine is by you.

Definitely ok with me. You make some good points.

Deep Sea · Post by **Deep Sea** » Sun Sep 28, 2003 3:30 pm

The only wqay it affects me is that it costs a hell of a lot of money to enforce drug laws.. thus a bigger chunk out of my paycheck.

Bingo! The bottom line is money and power. NO ONE can ever change that.

Right now it seems as if the present drug quagmire is a loose-loose situation. Time to cut the losses and do something positive?

This morning's Sunday Globe had an interesting article about Cocoa Politics. According to the Globe:

The Cocoaleros are angry at Americans because the drug war is destroying family businesses and putting people and entire villages out of work, like NAFTA has done to the states.
The Bush administration is winning the drug war in Columbia and his programs have been declared victories. However, neighboring Peru and Bolivia have taken up the slack. What kind of victory is that, and for whom.

So the plantations continue, and will continue to continue, and we are like the hapless Dutch Boy with his fingers in the Dike.

If one is to destroy South American drugs then what needs to happen?

If one is going to make American streets and Ghettos safe from drug-driven rime, and happy again, what needs to happen?

It is apparent that there are two dissimilar solutions. One is war and the other is legalization?

S'ppose, for example, Cocoa is wiped out. Impossible, but s'ppose it is. What next?

Opiates from China and other South Asian countries.

And then, and then....
A better solution would be to go with the flow rather than to hold back the tide?

This is a lot larger, and much more serious issue than one of small groups of drug-using college students, much bigger.

What's that old, old cliche? If you can't beat 'em join 'em? And join 'em to do what and for what reasons?

Panther · Post by **Panther** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 4:28 pm

Deep Sea wrote: Bingo! The bottom line is money and power. NO ONE can ever change that.

"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed or enforced or objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on the guilt. Now, that's the system ... , that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with." - Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand, 1957

Being the lover of Freedom that I am... I also wonder about the willingness and desire on everyone's part to tax drugs. The ability to tax is the ability to control. Are you so sure you want to take that step down the slippery slope? IF you advocate taxing drugs and take the position that "you don't do them so why do you care", consider the fact that some other group of people might propose a tax on studying the martial arts! If that tax is high enough, it can essentially prevent the legal study of the martial arts by many of us. The power to tax is the power to control. Consider that when you advocate "taxing the hell" out of something you don't care about. The next (unjust) tax might just be on something you do care about.

benzocaine · Post by **benzocaine** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 8:15 pm

Panther- consider the fact that some other group of people might propose a tax on studying the martial arts! If that tax is high enough, it can essentially prevent the legal study of the martial arts by many of us. The power to tax is the power to control. Consider that when you advocate "taxing the hell" out of something you don't care about. The next (unjust) tax might just be on something you do care about.

I could say that many of us already have our Karate taxed in one form or another. Many of us pay dues which can then be classified as income for the sensei.. who then must pay a tax on it.

Taxes are not exactly bad... they help build roads, airports, and do all sorts of posotive for the good of the entire country.

I want to use cigarette taxes as an example of a good tax. They help pay the ENOURNOUS hospital bills that tobacco has caused... while simultaneously making cigarettes more difficult to afford.. thus making folks think about the money they could save if they quit. I would like to believe that if pot was legal and was taxed the money could go towards treating people with drug addictions (who want to quit) or even towards something like paying off the huge defecit we will experience soon.... to me it is a lot better than taxing income... or my car.

ljr · Post by **ljr** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 9:33 pm

Panther wrote: "There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed or enforced or objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on the guilt. Now, that's the system ... , that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with." - Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand, 1957

Just had to mention that this is my favorite quote of all time....

Arnisador84 · Post by **Arnisador84** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 9:48 pm

The question of taxing seems to come down to is whether a "sin tax" is acceptable or not. In Washington state sin taxes on cigarettes have been embraced with votes for somewhere around 60-65%. In recent elections, sin taxes have received a more resounding 'yes' vote than any other issues, if my memory serves me right.

Granted, Washington is a firmly liberal state on most issues, and not at all a template for the rest of the country. For Washington state though, if the majority of the people think it is the right thing to do, then it is out of the hands of the minority. This is the basic concept behind a representative government.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that taxing legalized drugs is an issue- right or wrong- that can only be decided by the majority, just as the legalization itself. If smokers don't like it, appeals can be made to try to have it ruled unconstitutional (or something along those lines, I don't really know). We should keep in mind if the product gets taxed too much, the choking out of the street market will no longer be effective, so we have to be cautious about getting over zealous.

Thinking out loud,
Andrew Heuett

Gene DeMambro · Post by **Gene DeMambro** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 11:34 pm

We all seem to be forgetting the limits on governmental power here in the Republic.

Gene

Deep Sea · Post by **Deep Sea** » Tue Sep 30, 2003 11:10 am

Being the lover of Freedom that I am... I also wonder about the willingness and desire on everyone's part to tax drugs. The ability to tax is the ability to control. Are you so sure you want to take that step down the slippery slope? IF you advocate taxing drugs and take the position that "you don't do them so why do you care", consider the fact that some other group of people might propose a tax on studying the martial arts! If that tax is high enough, it can essentially prevent the legal study of the martial arts by many of us. The power to tax is the power to control. Consider that when you advocate "taxing the hell" out of something you don't care about. The next (unjust) tax might just be on something you do care about

I like Freedom too, Bart, but the days of American freedom are gone, and maybe forever.

Hokay . . . Maybe just state-run "drug stores" like state-run liquor stores in NH. Just the regular sales tax plus the luxury tax. So the state and/or feds get their cut. Maybe in Massachusetts the dough can be used like the Big Dig.

What should be cared about is the cleaning up of streets, and if Big Brother controls controlled substances then maybe that college kid wouldn't have gotten into the harms way. Now, then, here's a point for saving "innocent" lives.

The "Sin Tax?" Doesn’t Washington state have a sin tax on coffee as well?