69 Billion Dollars of our hard earned tax dollars are flushed down the toilet each year
By Demophilus Posted in Archived — Comments (20) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The first drug law was passed in this nation just 10 years after the Civil War ended in 1875.*
"In 1875, San Francisco passed the nation's first anti-drug law, the Opium Den Ordinance, aimed specifically at Chinese opium smoking."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/03/04/ING44OD4AU1....
If the 132 year old failed ban on a flower(Poppy)and it's derivatives the Opiates(Heroin,Morphine,& Opium)was ever going to be successful it would have been well before now. We have never altered the way in which we deal with our nations drug problem. We have only used the exact same approach that was used back in 1875 and Law enforcement, Punishment, and prohibition to drive the price up just hasn't worked even worse I doubt that it ever stopped one single user since drugs are widely available in our nations prisons and jails. Our government has only done the same exact thing over and over again since 1875.
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. ”
-Benjamin Franklin
generally the "preferred solution" is to legalize drugs.
____
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.
From a consumption tax on Nazi Crank and Heroin?
"...and each wasted evening is
a gross violation against the
natural course of your only life;"
-Charles Buckowski
the poppy's and also the cocaine crops from South America directly from the farmers who grow them .Then we could just destroy the crops. I't would be cheaper to do that and it also would prevent the terrorists from making millions and using the profits to fight their Jihad agains us .
I would also support legalizing at least marijuana and maybe even the rest of the now banned substances. We have 700,000 people in prison for drugs alone and it's not fair for the taxpayers to have to finance the imprisonment of a bunch of non violent small time hoods and drug addicts. I don't want my hard earned dollars used to babysit a bunch of harmless pothead punk by sending them to prison.
http://www.redstate.com/blogs/demophilus/2007/apr/10/u_s_government_is_f...
Don't get me wrong I hate drugs however the war on drugs has been just one constant expensive failed disaster.
prior to 911 and you propose to cut off funding to the new government? I still don't get the drug war angle. It's a whole new ball game over there now.
them from cheating? They could sell the raw product to the cartels. We would be in a bidding war. Not convinced.
Taliban because of our governments eagerness to have some success on the war on drugs. I surely don't want them to stop funding Karzi government which is our friends. The War on Drugs still has a major impact in Afghanistan.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-afghandrugs5dec05,0,...
and then buy the product directly? And we know the growers are not Taliban? Do we compete against drug traffickers from around the world? Seems complicated but if you can keep funds from the bad guys well.
I assume you would want the government to sell the drugs and have them regulated? To keep them pure, make sure no other harmful substances were in them? If that be the case, the "harmless pothead punks" would still be out stealing things to convert to cash. The easiest way junkies make money is by doing burlaries. The only non-violent burglar is one who has not been confronted by a busines or home owner. So, even thought the government would be out of the war on drugs, the dopers would still be waging war on the rest of us.
ring true that we would be victims of crime just because people arew high sure there would be some criminals that are drug users but there are also many straight criminals.
The fact is most drug users are not real criminals.The statistics show that before 1915 drugs and crime weren't even associated together only after the drugs were made illegal that same year did the black market create the crime problem that is now associated with drugs. You would have some idiots that shoplifr the drugs just like they do beer but you wouldn't have the violence that we have today.
Don't listen to me let these high ranking cops can tell you that.
“I think the Drug War has been arguably the single most devastating, dysfunctional, harmful social policy since slavery.”
—Retired Seattle Police Chief Norm Stamper
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP)
Demophilus, can you provide us with some prospective statistics on public safety -- i.e. automobile accidents, random acts of violence, crimes and other acts performed by those under the influence of these drugs -- once they're legalized and "cheaper than beer"? Note I'm not talking about acts performed to support the habit; I'm talking about acts performed under the influence of the drug.
-
NARF
have never fought with a whacked-out crack-head. They just go to Harvard(or insert your favorite higher learning institution) for another degree. Matter of fact, they have no idea what goes on on the street. They stopped being cops and became administrators.
As to legalizing mj, in all the time I talked to coke heads, who happened to be in jail because of the crimes they committed, every one of them started with mj. Even they knew it was a gateway drug. And they went to the crack pipe or powder just to get a little higher. And, started committing more crimes to get the money to buy what they wanted.
Rather than put drug dealers in prison, I say detox them, scan them for bad things, kill them and part them out for transplants. Think of it as post birth abortions or fully matured stem cell harvesting.
Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.
First, you come along and say that opposing abortion is a lost cause, and even though you are desperately opposed, we might as well just forget it and cave to the pro-aborts.
Now, though I'm sure you are desperately opposed to drug use, we might as well legalize it because we lose, lose, lose.
You are enough of a defeatocrat that you may as well just convert to a full fledged D because I have yet to see anything for which you would be willing to fight.
I meant what I said and I said what I meant. An elephant's faithful 100 percent.
What would that change be?