a 'drug' question...

[sfws09]

will someone tell me why the 'war on drugs' is 'bad'? i have seen what drugs can do to a family first hand. while i can see why pot isnt all that bad, or maybe even not bad, what about coke, lsd, meth.....

 

[Working Poor]

The thing is the war on drugs has been going on for about 30 years and it keeps getting worse what does that tell ya?

 

[sfws09]

what are you calling the wod? what is getting worse?

 

[FunkBuddha]

The war on drugs creates a black market for drugs, guns, and to some extent prostitution. Little kids in ghettos see the easy successes of the drug dealers and gang bangers and they decide they want to join them rather than educate themselves and get out.

Also, I forget the exact percentage, but somewhere around 50% of the people in jail in this country are in there for non-violent drug related charges. Meaning, they didn't hurt anyone, they just wanted to get high.

The meth problem we see today is a direct consequence of the war on drugs because its cheap and easy to make with a huge margin. If other drugs such as cocaine were legal and sold in drug stores, it's likely we would have never seen crack or methamphetamine. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying using cocaine is a good thing, but it's not the drug our shools and our MSM make it out to be. Trust me, I've done my share.

I think a lot of the drug use in this country comes from the fact that it's illegal and curiosity leads people to try them. I know that's how it was for me. I've done about every drug there is with the exception of heroin and I'm a normal productive member of society. I just grew out of it, got married and had a kid.

According to LEAP(Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, check them out), prior to the drug war, 1% of the US population was addicted to drugs. Now, 40 years, at least 80 billion dollars later, and countless lives ended/ruined, 1% of the US population is still addicted to drugs. So what have we gained with the war on drugs?

Nothing. But we sure fucked up a lot of peoples lives with it.

 

[FindLiberty]

L.E.A.P. they get it... www.leap.cc

Most only admit to it after retirement, but it's truth that stands up to the light of day. Many are brave enough to join LEAP even before retirement!

It's what the LP has been saying all along:
The war on drugs is just another gubermint failure... with horrible unintended consequences.

I hope those negative consequences were (at least originally) unintended! With the exposure of all the official corruption and manipulation through MSM, cia, DARE programs in schools, elected officials and enforcement officers that have all contributed to damaging our society instead of helping, it's all got to end ASAP.

After 35 years, it's clearly not helping or working. Just let freedom and free markets decide.

 

[[email protected]]

Here is a good documentary on it. The first few minutes are in Dutch, but the rest is in English.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=864268000924014458&q=war+on+drugs+site%3Avideo.google.com&total=240&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

 

[constituent]

SIMPLE,

Because we're people, not dogs.

(an inmate staffed calling center)

 

[FreeTraveler]

Prohibition = gangs, war in the streets = total failure already proven
War On Drugs = Prohibition (without a Constitutional Amendment)

Prohibition brought us tremendous growth in the Mafia. Have you heard we're having a problem with gangs in the inner cities these days?

Make anything illegal, and you get lower quality, higher-cost products in higher quantities, with the supply chain controlled by criminals who will do anything to protect their huge profit margin.

It also works with prostitution, gambling, prescription drugs, and even gun control.

Not one product's distribution has EVER been successfully controlled by declaring it "illegal" but it does give TPTB a great excuse to spend billions militarizing the police and making people fearful of the government, which is the REAL reason for the whole process.

Quo Bono - Who Benefits, when combined with a little thought "outside the box" will help you discover what's really going on in every case of government actions that don't seem to make sense on the surface, or even those that do.

 

[Danke]

"When they took the 4th Amendment, I was quiet because I didn't deal drugs. When they took the 6th Amendment, I was quiet because I am innocent. When they took the 2nd Amendment, I was quiet because I don't own a gun. Now they have taken the 1st Amendment, and I can only be quiet."

http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2000/12/40532


http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3659

 

[Bruno]

"When they took the 4th Amendment, I was quiet because I didn't deal drugs. When they took the 6th Amendment, I was quiet because I am innocent. When they took the 2nd Amendment, I was quiet because I don't own a gun. Now they have taken the 1st Amendment, and I can only be quiet."

http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2000/12/40532


http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3659

Brilliant quote.

 

[pcosmar]

Where was the "big drug problem" when all drugs were legal?

Todays drug problem is a Government created problem.

 

[Bruno]

will someone tell me why the 'war on drugs' is 'bad'? i have seen what drugs can do to a family first hand. while i can see why pot isnt all that bad, or maybe even not bad, what about coke, lsd, meth.....

Read this book. It's an easy read at at your local library. It discusses the thousands of obscure laws that make activities by consentual adults criminal.
In order to create a crime, you have to have a victim. You cannot be the victim and the criminal at the same time - a practice that occurs when you use drugs and they arrest you for it.

Just stand back and look at it objectively. "Hey, put that joint (meth, coke, whatever) down. It's bad for you. On second thought, I'll show you how bad it is for you by putting you in jail and charging tax payers $35,000 a year for your incarceration for that $50 worth of crack. Then you'll learn not to cause harm to yourself."

Ain't Nobody's Business if You Do - by Peter McWilliams.

Drugs are not evil. What people do when on drugs can be harmful to others. When you do harm physical harm to others or their property, you should be liable to the law. When you are only sitting in your house getting high on whatever you want (if you cold eat dirt and get high do it for all I care) then you aren't doing anyone else harm.

All of the drugs on the black market today were once perfectly legal in the United States. It is the illegality of drugs that causes the most harm of all.

Alcohol deaths are double the amount of all illegal drug deaths COMBINED. Not one single death, disease, or ailment has ever been attributed to marijuana, though that is largely besides the point. If I want to snort plutonium, I should be able to if I wasn't risking the lives of others.

"Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness".

 

[sfws09]

thanks...... to some of you

i do realize that the black market for anything is bad, but what if all drugs were legal? "hey, lets go down to the local CVS and get some coke/crack/ect..." would this bee good? could there be some provisions? who would make/produce the drugs? the govt? what about the high taxes they would put on it?:o

these are some questions i have.

btw, im not saying there should be a WOD, so some of you can quit 'talking down' to me.

 

[TER]

thanks...... to some of you

i do realize that the black market for anything is bad, but what if all drugs were legal? "hey, lets go down to the local CVS and get some coke/crack/ect..." would this bee good? could there be some provisions? who would make/produce the drugs? the govt? what about the high taxes they would put on it?:o

these are some questions i have.

btw, im not saying there should be a WOD, so some of you can quit 'talking down' to me.

If drugs were legal, private industries would produce them.

Perhaps there might be high taxes on them.

If you are involved in an incident which harms another person while intoxicated, there could be provisions for harsher penalties.

These are my guesses.

By the way, sniffing certain chemicals that can be easily purchased at Home Depot are abused for the high and are addictive and are very harmful for the body. Should you sniff it? No! Should the government imprison you for doing so? Absolutely no!

 

[FreeTraveler]

thanks...... to some of you

i do realize that the black market for anything is bad, but what if all drugs were legal? "hey, lets go down to the local CVS and get some coke/crack/ect..." would this bee good? could there be some provisions? who would make/produce the drugs? the govt? what about the high taxes they would put on it?:o

these are some questions i have.

btw, im not saying there should be a WOD, so some of you can quit 'talking down' to me.

People go down to the local CVS and buy alcohol and tobacco today. Both drugs are arguably more dangerous than the drugs that are prohibited today.

None of these are government issues, and particularly not FedGov issues. No drugs were illegal in the past, and abuse was a tiny fraction of what it is today.

If people want to do drugs, or hire hookers, or kill themselves, as long as they don't infringe on other people, why should the government have anything at all to do or say about it?

Taxation is theft. Of course the gov't would have to steal their share, what gang doesn't?

 

[Bruno]

thanks...... to some of you

i do realize that the black market for anything is bad, but what if all drugs were legal? "hey, lets go down to the local CVS and get some coke/crack/ect..." would this bee good? could there be some provisions? who would make/produce the drugs? the govt? what about the high taxes they would put on it?:o

these are some questions i have.

btw, im not saying there should be a WOD, so some of you can quit 'talking down' to me.

If you construed any of my comments as talking down to you, I apologize. That was not my intent.

 

[Perry]

A very simple example is to look at prohibition in the early 20th century.
Everything that happened in that time is happening today with drugs.
Prohibition was a total disaster that did nothing but create not only crime but organized crime(mafia). One of the worst things drugs do is create crime because people need large amounts of money to buy them so they will do anything it takes to get the money. If drugs are legal they are cheap and most people don't need to rob and prostitute themselves for cash.
I by the way am very anti-drug as I have seen the detestation that addiction causes.
Still, individuals should have the freedom to decide if this is how they want to live their lives.
Making drugs legal would have an immediate impact on the crime rate in this country as robberies & prostitution would drop 50%. also nasty street drugs like crack cocaine would disappear because cleaner less poisonous drugs would become cheaper.

 

[Unspun]

Several reasons why it's wrong... a few of them include.

A) The way it's being fought. Spying on peoples financial transactions, using violence and coercion to apprehend suspects, and putting people in prison or giving large fines is such a terrible way to treat people who are sick or doing whatever it is they want as long as they are not hurting someone.

B) It is a victimless crime. No one is harmed in the act of taking the drug other than the user. Some may become violent or steal to get more money or drugs, but regardless, the crime should not be ingesting a drug, but teh actual crime that involves a victim.

C) It's not a criminal issue and it's being treated that way. The way to treat this is to treat it much more like alcoholics are being treated--like they have mental or health issues and treated accordingly. Rarely ever will you see an alcoholic being put in prison unless he or she did something that should be against the law (rape, murder, recklessness, vandalize, rob, assault, etc).

 

[Kotin]

the whole point is, it does not matter whether these drugs are as bad as they say, which i dont believe they are. but it is the fact that this is no business of the government.


they have no authority to have a "war" on lifestyle or personal choice unless it infringes on someone else's rights.

 

[constituent]

the whole point is, it does not matter whether these drugs are as bad as they say, which i dont believe they are. but it is the fact that this is no business of the government.


they have no authority to have a "war" on lifestyle or personal choice unless it infringes on someone else's rights.

but that argument doesn't seem to be getting the health freedom crowd anywhere.

the propaganda (which also happens to be lies, lies, lies btw) is too strong. people have to be force fed the reality imo.