Do No Evil – The drug war is based on a repugnant assertion: that you do not have ownership over your own body; that you don't have the right to decide what you'll do with your body, with your property and with your life. The position of the drug warriors is that you should be in jail if you decide to do something with your body that they don't approve of.
This year,the new congress will vote on whether to continue funding for the ONDCP (drug czars office).Please tell your representatives to vote to discontinue this wasteful,ineffective ministry of propaganda.
Good point. I also think that the people who are having the "knee jerk" reaction against drug legalization are not factoring in the money equation. (Sorry for the long sentence.) The simple fact is that there are people in prison right now for drug possession charges who would LIKE to quit but can't because there's not enough treatment programs. The money that's being used to fight the drug war should be channelled instead into drug treatment.
nakedtruth,
You are absolutely right that legalizing drugs would reduce the prison population (savings) reduce the need for enforcement (savings) make it easier to get treatment (savings in ruined lives).
An additional huge benefit would be that it would remove the incentive to get people hooked. Pushers aren't called pushers for nothing. They are not simply sellers, they get people hooked on drugs to turn huge profits. Legalization would remove the opportunity to make huge profits and would probably reduce the number of people who start to use drugs. It is the drug lords who would be the biggest losers if drugs were legalized, and I'm sure their lobbyists work hard to avoid such a move. They need to keep the fear of drugs alive to ensure their market.
If you watch TV, you can see that big (legal) drug companies are pushing their products too. Count how many drug commercials you see during the evening news.
For some strange reason, people equate legalization with promotion. The two don't have to go together; there is no reason why legalization couldn't be accompanied by a massive education campaign.
In my youth, I lived in a country where one could freely grow marijuana or poppies. I knew at the time that morphine came from the poppy plant, but nobody used them for that purpose except the pharmaceutical companies. The people used the marijuana plant to make rope and the poppies for poppy seeds. The first time I became aware of wide-spread drug use was during the Vietnam war.
My point is that it's not opportunity that creates the drug users but, among other things, despair and the pushers do.
The past century should have been enough to demonstrate that outlawing drugs is ineffective and has serious side effect.
Please tell your reps to also abolish the following worthless government programs:
1. EPA, DEA, TSA, IRS and HHS.
2. National Endownment for the Arts
3. Public TV and radio
4. Department of Education
5. OSHA
6. Abolish Social security and Send me back all my money you have confiscated over the years plus a little interest.
7. Abolish any welfare program, corporate or personal
8. Stop funding for Public Education
9. This list could go on for pages with wasteful, inefficient agencies that deal in propaganda so just put all the agencies in alphabetical order and eliminate all the odd ones and we will work on paring down the even ones next year.
Seriously, invest07 and V...
HHS includes the National Institutes of Health, which funds quite a bit of medical research and also includes the Centers for Disease Control.
OSHA protects workers from unscrupulous employers who put their employees' health and well-being at risk.
Public education, like it or not, is pretty much the only education most people in this country get. If you have a feasible alternative solution, I'd like to hear it.
In the interest of disclosure I'll set my bias out. I have seen first hand the destructive and soul destroying effects that accompany drugs like crack cocaine. I oppose any move towards legalizing or decriminalizing that type of drug.
I'm ambivalent about pot use and I do think that it's illegal status has done little other than crowd prisons, enrich criminals and waste money.
I think that my position is more one of drawing lines in a different place than where they are currently drawn.
That said the results generated by the current "war on drugs" tactics are not commensurate with the massive resources allocated to it. Logically it's time to change the approach.
although I favor full legalization of all drugs - I appreciate your candor about this, and fully respect your position.
But, I will also take the position that making drugs like crack or heroin ILLEGAL has done little to nothing to stop the use of them.
When we make these drugs illegal, we drive crime way way up = because people have to resort to criminal activity to get their fix (and we'll never ever stop that) We drive taxes up because it costs so much to fight this ever-losing "war"
In short, the drug war makes our streets more dangerous, and you less prosperous.
On top of it, when drugs are legal, it's much easier for someone to actually get help - without the fear of jail.
With every measure there is a price to pay. I mistakenly voted a positive vote for this comment but it is totally against what I believe.
We have to come up with different means of approaching this problem legalizing drugs is not the answer.
We do have morals when it comes to how we are preceived. Right is right and wrong is wrong it is bad ethics to condone such behavior.
Also, "two wrongs don't make a right"
That's interesting. The problem is this - when we give politicians the power to tell US what's right and wrong, you put yourself in grave danger.
Yes, you may personally agree with keeping some bad drugs illegal, while allowing other bad ones to be legal.
But, what happens when some politician who doesn't like YOUR morals, makes what you believe in illegal?
what's right is for people to make their own choices - to determine what's good and bad for themselves.
and that's that.
Absolutely populist, that is a bulls eye!
It has to do with "true freedom", and all of the individual responsibility entrusted upon each and every "mature" person living in what is supposed to be a free society.
Hey frets, "true freedom" is anarchy!
Well, I think it's interesting that there is more than one definition for the word. It's not only a state of lawlessness, or mob rule due to lack of government, but also a utopian society that has no government and enjoys complete freedom.
I wouldn't put much trust in either because a complete lack of government of course isn't realistic. I just believe personally that many in the US including myself, have allowed the feds. to wander way beyond the bounderies of pulic servanthood. I believe too many choices for the peaceful daily life in America have been taken away from the common man, and way too many abuses of power have damaged our security, both finacial and physically. Not to mention what has been displayed to the rest of the world here lately.
Hey populist, isn't the reason we have law makers to make laws? So therefore, is it not their job to tell us what is right, and what is wrong?
And if one person thinks murder is moral should all people be forced to think it's moral? How can so many people think drugs that are now illegal can somehow be rendered less harmful if legalized, if it cost money illegally than it will still cost money legally. Maybe that is where you want that social program money to go so druggies don't have to pay for it. Drug dealers are just as low a life form as pedophiles, they prey on people who can not defend themselves and don't care about the damaged lives they leave behind. How many innocent lives have been lost because drug use or drug dealers have gotten out of control? Legalizing drugs would just make the violence and family anguish increase tenfold with less control of the plague that would ensue. We need laws and the means to restrain people who have lost control over street drugs and prisons for those who sell indiscriminately, tearing apart the very fabric of society.
Jaydee40,
Drugs have been illegal for a long time now. Has the problem diminished? You are saying: "Drug dealers are just as low a life form as pedophiles, they prey on people who can not defend themselves." You are absolutely right. However, if drugs were legal, where would the drug dealers be? If it were as profitable to sell drugs as to sell socks, what incentive would they have to push it on people?
Alcohol was illegal in at least parts of the US for a while. What did that accomplish? It supported organized crime. People still drank it, it was just riskier.
maybe we should legalize pedophilia as well? is that what you are saying? I know your not so don't worry, but legalizing it will not help the problem. Drugs are not a good thing. get that. Illegal drugs are illegal for a reason, the common joe or joanna if you like, does not have the ability to make rational decisions while under the influence. After seeing how many people here are recreational drug users I now understand how come the country is now in the fix it is, it truly explains a lot of the posts I have seen lately.
"If it were as profitable to sell drugs as to sell socks, what incentive would they have to push it on people?"
Socks are a piece of clothing, not addictive, not damaging to your body, do not take large amounts of money to keep up addiction, and do not cause domestic violence. So a legal drug dealer would be just as likely to push drugs as a illegal drug dealer, get em hooked and a repeat costumer.
The US Dept of Agriculture determined that ,if legal,marijuana would cost about $4 per pound to grow.If a farmer charged $100 per lb,with a $100 tax per lb,the cost to the consumer would still be 10 times cheaper than black market prices.The dealer who just paid $2000 per lb would be instantly out of business.
Not a member? Sign-up today!
jorgepratt19711962
pyuuuke
sterlingburt19681962
adrielh791966
rylandl831968
maneetion
mekhifranks1975
hyooo25
popperous
shawnmartinez1960
soulkeeper009
hatukabu
nopatacious
darwinm701977
getbackerzoo
drugs
ukraine
woodywood20
LisaFo
Hullios
dr_martin
CleoKFletcher
outname
Alexey
uncogito
SCJDM
bush.jr
lovingu
berns
newstyle
camions
maitreya
cocallag
Cavemn1
blothbelt
trnscndr
JenMurdock
Radiofreeeuropa
_kam0_
scriblerus1
pawfoots
MSF2
DeadHead13
chachawhawha
kam80
Candida
Wil
eugenegerard
sierragurl
icono1
599)
Two of the worst drug warriors in congress are Rep. Mark Souder (R) Indiana and Sen Joe Biden (D) Md.
Two of the friendliest are Sen Ted Kennedy (D) MA and Rep. Ron Paul (R) TX
Ron Paul - absolutely! Kennedy, on the other hand, not familiar with his position. Do you have any links to reference?
I dont have any links for Kennedy but I do know that he has always been in favor of ending the drug war.
you've been an excellent resource on these issues in the past, so I'll definitely take that as your seal of approval. If you happen to come across anything on it, please do send me an email to let me know.
I did contact Rep Joe Kennedy one time and recieved a personalized letter in thanks.If you can find Kennedy's voting record somewhere it will probably tell the tale.
Hey get a room...lol Populist is correct about kennedy, he has long been a warior on this issue.
Got a room,need a woman.
The most recent thing I know about Kennedy is that he,along with Kerry recently pushed for marijuana for medical research to be grown at the University of Mass /Amherst.Currently research grade marijuana can only be grown under the control of the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA),this buracracy is notorious for conducting tainted and disproven studies to try to show that marijuana is harmful and only supplies researchers with very low grade samples.
OK Pop,I googled Kennedy marijuana research...heres one
http://www.medicalmj.org/mjobstruct.htm
Quick pickin on my bro mntnman, or I will have the cops destroy your still and drink all your white lightning.
Thanks...just call the donut shop and send them over.
Don't forget. Ron Paul is running for President!
http://www.ronpaulexplore.com/
Do Republicans support drug prohibition because it finances criminals or because it finances terrorists?
Republican Socialism. Price supports for criminals and terrorists.
Of course the same can be said of many Dem politicians too!
Unfortunately many Democrats also support the cruel War on Drugs, which has ruined more lives than excessive drug use itself.
The 'war on drugs' hasn't done anything to address the root cause of drug abuse. Eliminating unemployment, poverty and despair would be a real war on drugs, one that the current administration isn't brave enough to wage.
They're kissin' cousins.
I don't know if this has been posted already,but I found it this morning.
Millions More for a Failed Anti-Drug Propaganda Campaign? Ridiculous!
Indiana House Republican Mark Souder, a White House point man in Congress for its propaganda war against drugs, recently took to the airwaves to defend one of the Bush administration's sacred cows: its National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign.
....produce public-service announcements implying that smoking pot supports al-Qaida and may make you pregnant, among other dubious anti-drug messages. So dubious, in fact, that the campaign has flopped miserably among its target audience. Of course, this fact matters not to the White House, which recently demanded $130 million to run the ads through 2008 -- a 31 percent increase over current funding levels.
click for rest of article.
http://www.alternet.org/drugreporter/49231/
Im sorry to say that this isnt really political. Its more about right or wrong. If you completely agree with the notion that drug use is a personal matter then you should agree that the problems there of is a personal matter. The govt should have to take care of your health. The govt should allow or not allow health insurance to some adults. Kids, absolutey, but parents that want to do the drugs while they raise their kids, should be questionable. There will always be some that can do fine but most havent. So what do you do with those... Adopotion?? They have a higher likelyhood to go into drug use. Send them to Mexico?? poverty in the states. I would rather see our flexible govt..ie how many atty's dismissed due to political reasons, but the next to dismiss will probally be a democrat. I am will to sacrafice myself for the better of the states. (D) or(R) only can agree on $$$. Dont place you alliance on them, base it all on you true beliefs, majority of the time