Page 1 of 1 pages
None of these alternatives are acceptable.
Give treatment to drug users? They chose to use the drugs; why should they be ‘given’ anything? Unless it is a charitable contribution of course. Responsible taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize treatment for the irresponsibility of excessive drug use.
Surgeon General should focus on harder drugs? Why should drug use be criminlized in the first place? A vice is not a crime. As long as you harm noone but yourself, you should be able to engage in whatever consentual activity you choose.
Any study of the history of drug prohibition reveals that it was borne out of xenophobia. Many drugs were prohibited as a way to ‘punish’ immigrants. Ex. Opium using Chinese at the beginning of the 20th Century.
Interventionist foreign policies to ‘discourage’ farmers from growing drug crops have been a miserable failure. Afghanistan poppy output this year is one of the best ever, despite the $400 million spent annually by fedgov to eradicate the crop. Also, crop eradication efforts in Colombia have failed, in addition to creating more animosity towards the U.S.
Drug war is the only way to keep children safe? Hardly. Polls have shown that drug use in countries with prohibition (like the U.S.) is higher than those without (like Holland). If your kids want to get drugs, they will get them.
Alcohol prohibition in the 1920’s proved to be a horrible failure. Yet, somehow, the politicians and the citizenry cannot see the failures of the war on illicit drugs.
Posted by JT_Lancer on Aug 5, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Giving treatment is a practical choice just as decriminalizing is…
It is far more costly to treat people in an emergency room (required by law) than to do preventative treatment.
The cost to arrest, prosecute, provide legal council and maintain prisons is a waste of taxpayer dollars far in excess of any treatment.
We could limit the treatment time and then let anyone who won’t quit buy cheaply if they choose to kill themselves.
As it is now:
Posted by whattheheck on Aug 6, 2007 at 7:57 AM
Taxation would also be an important part of a legalization process. As can be seen from the above posting, in America we are seriously against “giving” anything to anyone for free because we want everything for ourselves, so in order to “give” medical treatment to addicts we would raise money by taxing those substances. Most currently illegal drugs would be much cheaper if they did not have to be smuggled in rectal cavaties, so taxation would not even raise the prices. The allure of illicit activity would be removed for kids that are rebelling so they would be forced to resort to vandalizm or fighting instead.
The truth is that America is a civilization on the declineand hardly worth preserving let alone working to change for the better. Why make things better for the future when it might make things worse for me now.
Posted by wickeddog on Aug 7, 2007 at 3:45 PM
Legalize it, marijuana is a huge cash crop in the United States, I think it was the 3rd biggest crop in about 15 states. You legalize it and tax it, generating a bunch of tax revenue and hopefully dismantling the gangs that formed to get it to users, reducing violence and the mysticism of the drug. Harder drugs are more of a concern, legalizing those is kind of questionable, like what would happen if ecstasy and cocaine and whatever were legal? Do you think use wold go down or people would just do it at home and everything would be fine? Or would use increase? I think with any legalization use would first increase, because suddenly everyone says “Wow cool I can smoke/snort whatever and no one can stop me!” But then a slow increase of taxes on them and the demystification sets in and use decreases. Does anyone think that’s viable?
Posted by AycofSpades on Aug 8, 2007 at 9:03 AM
There is only one alternative.
To borrow from Nancy Reagan: just say “no!”
No to keeping the street value of drugs so high that people shoot each other over them.
No to criminalizing an act that has no victims but the actor, and punishing individuals for their weaknesses.
No to wasting millions upon millions of dollars on totalitarian right wing death squads overseas under the guise of eradicating drugs.
No to the pharmaceutical companies whose main agenda is to prevent people from medicating themselves.
No to the control freak Bible wielding maniacs who presume to proscribe the boundaries of moral behavior, and will resort to whatever measures are necessary to codify and preserve their own twisted sense of self-righteousness into law.
No to the jack-booted thugs who knock down doors with battering rams and shoot old ladies to death—only later to discover they had the wrong house.
No to the gambling addicts who presume to write books on virtues.
No to talk show hosts who demand drug abusers be locked up forever then use their wealth to get out of jail scot free after doctor-shopping their hillbilly herion scrip, only to be caught smuggling illicit mountains of Viagra back into the country after a sex vacation in the Carribean where the girls are young and tender, and the cigars are Cuban.
No to all you hypocrite bastards—may you all rot in hell.
Waiting on the world to change…
Posted by trippin on Aug 20, 2007 at 7:18 AM
trippin, You have proven the point with your last line:
“Waiting on the world to change…”
If everyone took action instead of waiting, maybe the world would change.
Posted by wickeddog on Aug 22, 2007 at 4:03 PM
The more I learn, the stronger I feel about drug abuse.
I recently read that >61% people currently imprisoned in the United States are there for drug related crimes. I think the estimate was low.
I believe that all drugs should be decriminalized. I’ve thought about this for many years. I was 19 in 1979. I tried many things that are now considered controlled substances or are completely banned from our country. As I lost friends to drugs and jails and a sister to an overdose, I would have to be either deaf, dumb, blind or an out and out liar not to see that something is wrong with our government’s approach to what they call, “The War On Drugs”.
Why not have places that people can go to, pay for and do all the drugs they want? The have to turn in ID and car keys at the door. They will have to sign a form absolving everyone involved from any diseases they might catch or any harm that might come to them. The have to be sober when they leave, which will be determined by a blood test, Urine test or something not yet thought of.
All women who enter must receive either a shot of Deprovera upon arrival or the morning after pill each day they stay.
Syringes and Condoms will be free and their use will be encouraged to prevent further spread of STDs.
As in most cases, the people who have more money will be able to rent a room. Otherwise, sofas, cots, tables and chairs will be there for all to use. People will also be able to purchase food, showers and various other sundries.
Those people who have no money will be able to work there as a cleaner, cook, etc.
The now, unemployed corrections officers, police will be able to learn how to counsel and instruct people. The money to pay them will come from the money spent on drugs and the amount of money saved by not having to police drug infested areas and support the court system and prisons which pour far too much money into a no win situation every day.
This is just an idea. I’m sure there are more and better ideas out that together, maybe we, the people of the United States can com up with a working idea that will save our country and our children.
Posted by gglodoe@msn.com on Aug 30, 2007 at 4:27 AM
Gglodoe,
There are two groups of people you would have to defeat to pass the legislation that would help this country with the war on drugs problem.
1. Wealthy people who rely on the system to keep the poor down.
2. Wealthy drug dealers who rely on the system to keep drugs expensive.
Considering both groups have immense amounts of money and the second group will use murder and bribery, you have an impossible battle.
Posted by wickeddog on Sep 6, 2007 at 5:16 PM
Wickeddog,
What makes you think the first group are above murder and bribery?
Throughout history, many a brother/sister killed for money, power, love, etc. I profess no religious beliefs but I am familiar with the story of Cain and Abel.
Perhaps god rejected the one son’s offering because he was burning hemp but passing it through his lungs first.
I mean no disrespect to any belief system but am trying to inject a little humor into a sad situation.
I see the drug situation as a reflection of our society as a whole, a bunch of power hungry, rich people trying and succeeding to keep us in our place while they remain in control.
We could change things if we were willing to expend the effort. But we all sit still while George #2 and his cohorts strip away our rights.
Now, they can tap the phone of people suspected of any involvement with drugs and use the information they have gathered from a private conversation as evidence against us.
We have a constitutional mandate to take our govt. back when it has become oppressive but we live in fear. I think the real fear we have is not from terrorists but from our inability to stand against our own govt. and demand our rights be given back to us.
I remember, when I was younger, there was a saying, “We have met the enemy and they are us”.
gglodoe
Posted by gglodoe@msn.com on Sep 8, 2007 at 12:26 AM
gglodoe, I only meant directly, sure they could use their money to hire killers but you are not seriously arguing that the Daltons or the Connolys are personally committing murders.
Posted by wickeddog on Oct 1, 2007 at 10:43 AM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Reader Comments
None of these alternatives are acceptable.
Give treatment to drug users? They chose to use the drugs; why should they be ‘given’ anything? Unless it is a charitable contribution of course. Responsible taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize treatment for the irresponsibility of excessive drug use.
Surgeon General should focus on harder drugs? Why should drug use be criminlized in the first place? A vice is not a crime. As long as you harm noone but yourself, you should be able to engage in whatever consentual activity you choose.
Any study of the history of drug prohibition reveals that it was borne out of xenophobia. Many drugs were prohibited as a way to ‘punish’ immigrants. Ex. Opium using Chinese at the beginning of the 20th Century.
Interventionist foreign policies to ‘discourage’ farmers from growing drug crops have been a miserable failure. Afghanistan poppy output this year is one of the best ever, despite the $400 million spent annually by fedgov to eradicate the crop. Also, crop eradication efforts in Colombia have failed, in addition to creating more animosity towards the U.S.
Drug war is the only way to keep children safe? Hardly. Polls have shown that drug use in countries with prohibition (like the U.S.) is higher than those without (like Holland). If your kids want to get drugs, they will get them.
Alcohol prohibition in the 1920’s proved to be a horrible failure. Yet, somehow, the politicians and the citizenry cannot see the failures of the war on illicit drugs.
Giving treatment is a practical choice just as decriminalizing is…
It is far more costly to treat people in an emergency room (required by law) than to do preventative treatment.
The cost to arrest, prosecute, provide legal council and maintain prisons is a waste of taxpayer dollars far in excess of any treatment.
We could limit the treatment time and then let anyone who won’t quit buy cheaply if they choose to kill themselves.
As it is now:
Taxation would also be an important part of a legalization process. As can be seen from the above posting, in America we are seriously against “giving” anything to anyone for free because we want everything for ourselves, so in order to “give” medical treatment to addicts we would raise money by taxing those substances. Most currently illegal drugs would be much cheaper if they did not have to be smuggled in rectal cavaties, so taxation would not even raise the prices. The allure of illicit activity would be removed for kids that are rebelling so they would be forced to resort to vandalizm or fighting instead.
The truth is that America is a civilization on the declineand hardly worth preserving let alone working to change for the better. Why make things better for the future when it might make things worse for me now.
Legalize it, marijuana is a huge cash crop in the United States, I think it was the 3rd biggest crop in about 15 states. You legalize it and tax it, generating a bunch of tax revenue and hopefully dismantling the gangs that formed to get it to users, reducing violence and the mysticism of the drug. Harder drugs are more of a concern, legalizing those is kind of questionable, like what would happen if ecstasy and cocaine and whatever were legal? Do you think use wold go down or people would just do it at home and everything would be fine? Or would use increase? I think with any legalization use would first increase, because suddenly everyone says “Wow cool I can smoke/snort whatever and no one can stop me!” But then a slow increase of taxes on them and the demystification sets in and use decreases. Does anyone think that’s viable?
There is only one alternative.
To borrow from Nancy Reagan: just say “no!”
No to keeping the street value of drugs so high that people shoot each other over them.
No to criminalizing an act that has no victims but the actor, and punishing individuals for their weaknesses.
No to wasting millions upon millions of dollars on totalitarian right wing death squads overseas under the guise of eradicating drugs.
No to the pharmaceutical companies whose main agenda is to prevent people from medicating themselves.
No to the control freak Bible wielding maniacs who presume to proscribe the boundaries of moral behavior, and will resort to whatever measures are necessary to codify and preserve their own twisted sense of self-righteousness into law.
No to the jack-booted thugs who knock down doors with battering rams and shoot old ladies to death—only later to discover they had the wrong house.
No to the gambling addicts who presume to write books on virtues.
No to talk show hosts who demand drug abusers be locked up forever then use their wealth to get out of jail scot free after doctor-shopping their hillbilly herion scrip, only to be caught smuggling illicit mountains of Viagra back into the country after a sex vacation in the Carribean where the girls are young and tender, and the cigars are Cuban.
No to all you hypocrite bastards—may you all rot in hell.
Waiting on the world to change…
trippin, You have proven the point with your last line:
“Waiting on the world to change…”
If everyone took action instead of waiting, maybe the world would change.
The more I learn, the stronger I feel about drug abuse.
I recently read that >61% people currently imprisoned in the United States are there for drug related crimes. I think the estimate was low.
I believe that all drugs should be decriminalized. I’ve thought about this for many years. I was 19 in 1979. I tried many things that are now considered controlled substances or are completely banned from our country. As I lost friends to drugs and jails and a sister to an overdose, I would have to be either deaf, dumb, blind or an out and out liar not to see that something is wrong with our government’s approach to what they call, “The War On Drugs”.
Why not have places that people can go to, pay for and do all the drugs they want? The have to turn in ID and car keys at the door. They will have to sign a form absolving everyone involved from any diseases they might catch or any harm that might come to them. The have to be sober when they leave, which will be determined by a blood test, Urine test or something not yet thought of.
All women who enter must receive either a shot of Deprovera upon arrival or the morning after pill each day they stay.
Syringes and Condoms will be free and their use will be encouraged to prevent further spread of STDs.
As in most cases, the people who have more money will be able to rent a room. Otherwise, sofas, cots, tables and chairs will be there for all to use. People will also be able to purchase food, showers and various other sundries.
Those people who have no money will be able to work there as a cleaner, cook, etc.
The now, unemployed corrections officers, police will be able to learn how to counsel and instruct people. The money to pay them will come from the money spent on drugs and the amount of money saved by not having to police drug infested areas and support the court system and prisons which pour far too much money into a no win situation every day.
This is just an idea. I’m sure there are more and better ideas out that together, maybe we, the people of the United States can com up with a working idea that will save our country and our children.
Gglodoe,
There are two groups of people you would have to defeat to pass the legislation that would help this country with the war on drugs problem.
1. Wealthy people who rely on the system to keep the poor down.
2. Wealthy drug dealers who rely on the system to keep drugs expensive.
Considering both groups have immense amounts of money and the second group will use murder and bribery, you have an impossible battle.
Wickeddog,
What makes you think the first group are above murder and bribery?
Throughout history, many a brother/sister killed for money, power, love, etc. I profess no religious beliefs but I am familiar with the story of Cain and Abel.
Perhaps god rejected the one son’s offering because he was burning hemp but passing it through his lungs first.
I mean no disrespect to any belief system but am trying to inject a little humor into a sad situation.
I see the drug situation as a reflection of our society as a whole, a bunch of power hungry, rich people trying and succeeding to keep us in our place while they remain in control.
We could change things if we were willing to expend the effort. But we all sit still while George #2 and his cohorts strip away our rights.
Now, they can tap the phone of people suspected of any involvement with drugs and use the information they have gathered from a private conversation as evidence against us.
We have a constitutional mandate to take our govt. back when it has become oppressive but we live in fear. I think the real fear we have is not from terrorists but from our inability to stand against our own govt. and demand our rights be given back to us.
I remember, when I was younger, there was a saying, “We have met the enemy and they are us”.
gglodoe
gglodoe, I only meant directly, sure they could use their money to hire killers but you are not seriously arguing that the Daltons or the Connolys are personally committing murders.